Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (55625)	8/29/2002 11:22:37 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Oddly enough he was sentenced to die- and that didn't stick either. So maybe those pro-death penalty, kill 'em fry 'em advocates should take heed of that. What is needed is to make life without possibility of parole a real deal- neither the death penalty nor life terms worked here- so clearly, it is the judges (in this case) that are the problem, not the sentences (although I disagree with the death penalty- and believe life should really really mean life- with no chance at parole. And if they need a carrot for the inmates, let them work for their stupid TV privileges.)

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (55625)	8/29/2002 2:38:15 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Who can blame the man? After I read the article, I started to wonder why name change is not a common practice. It's not much trouble or expense. If you live in a small town or want to maintain contacts with family and old friends, of course, there would be no point to it. But if you want to start fresh somewhere else, it seems pretty elementary that you would change your name. I suppose most criminals just use aliases and don't go through a legal process. Does the fact that he is pursuing a legal process suggest that he plans to be a good citizen going forward? It would seem so. At least I haven't been able to come up with an alternate explanation.