Topic: Since when is bludgeoning someone to death not especially he
boredinaz06's photo
Tue 03/27/12 01:41 PM
Edited by boredinaz06 on Tue 03/27/12 01:42 PM
PHOENIX (AP) - The Arizona Supreme Court has thrown out the death sentence of a Tucson man who bludgeoned his girlfriend and her two children to death in 1984, ruling that the murders weren't especially heinous.

In its Tuesday ruling, the state's highest court vacated two death sentences for 61-year-old James Granvil Wallace and imposed two sentences of life in prison instead.

While the justices wrote that the Jan. 31, 1984, murders of Susan Insalaco and her 12-year-old son and 16-year-old daughter in their Tucson apartment were heinous in layman's terms, they weren't according to the letter of the law.

That's because the justices found that Wallace didn't knowingly inflict more wounds on the family than he thought were necessary to kill them.

Wallace turned himself in to police the day after he killed the family.


This dudes date with death was overturned by these retards because of their feelings the bludgeoning was not especially heinous even though he brutally murdered three people the state cannot kill him.

msharmony's photo
Tue 03/27/12 01:44 PM
thats interesting

death penalty isnt reserved for just 'heinous' crimes


I dont understand the relevance to the decision,,,,,,

mightymoe's photo
Tue 03/27/12 02:03 PM
Edited by mightymoe on Tue 03/27/12 02:09 PM
maybe because king barry doesn't like the death penalty? I read an article once about how he outlawed the use of one of the 3 chemicals needed for the lethal injection. so when the states run out, there is only one place they can get it, in england somewhere...


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/22/us/22lethal.html

AndyBgood's photo
Tue 03/27/12 02:09 PM
Liberals think as liberals act...


Stupid comes to mind!

USmale47374's photo
Tue 03/27/12 02:21 PM
King Barry? What Arizona official does that refer to? You ARE aware that the event mentioned is an Arizona state matter, aren't you?

boredinaz06's photo
Tue 03/27/12 02:38 PM

maybe because king barry doesn't like the death penalty? I read an article once about how he outlawed the use of one of the 3 chemicals needed for the lethal injection. so when the states run out, there is only one place they can get it, in england somewhere...


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/22/us/22lethal.html


A federal judge in WA just ruled that the drug can no longer be imported into the country.

Conrad_73's photo
Tue 03/27/12 03:17 PM
maybe need to put them to Death in the manner they did their Victims,since they outlawed the Chemical!spock

RKISIT's photo
Tue 03/27/12 03:21 PM
i'm only for the DP if it's cold blooded murder and this was,then they overturn it...wtf

Seakolony's photo
Tue 03/27/12 03:33 PM
That's okay we still have hanging firing squad beheading etc..........besides he probably won't make it two life sentences anyways

boredinaz06's photo
Tue 03/27/12 05:09 PM


Its pretty weak that the "justices" use the excuse that he didn't knowingly inflict more wounds on the family than he thought were necessary to kill them. Its almost like they were trying to make a joke or something.

Sojourning_Soul's photo
Wed 03/28/12 03:30 AM
Edited by Sojourning_Soul on Wed 03/28/12 03:31 AM
61 yrs old. no rent or utilities, 3 hots and a cot, free medical, cable tv, free internet, a job...all paid for by taxpayers....

where do I sign up?

msharmony's photo
Wed 03/28/12 03:44 PM
I think most americans could be offered ten million dollars, but if your conditions were they could not LEAVE a little room


except to go to a dangerous yard and exercise

,,you couldnt pay most americans to give up all their 'freedom'