No.1 Serial Killer in US History Pleads Guilty

[poind]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/05/green.ri...ings/index.html

In his statement, Ridgway said he targeted prostitutes "because I thought I could kill as many as I wanted without getting caught."

..."I hate most prostitutes. I did not want to pay them for sex," Ridgway acknowledged. "I also picked prostitutes as victims because they were easy to pick up, without being noticed. I knew they would not be reported missing right away, and might never be reported missing."

..."In most cases, when I murdered these women, I did not know their names," Ridgway's statement to the court said. "Most of the time, I killed them the first time I met them. I do not have a good memory for their faces. I killed so many women, I have a hard time keeping them straight."

Ridgway admitted placing the bodies in "clusters," usually near a landmark that helped him remember their locations.

"I did this because I wanted to keep track of all of the women I killed," he said in his statement, which he affirmed as Baird read it aloud. "I liked to drive by the clusters around the county and think about the women I placed there."

---

Can't decide if it's "better" for the guy to be kept in prison at gov't expense, or just be removed.

Just curious -- anyone opposed to death penalty who thinks the guy should live, period???

Some current corporate crooks are now looking at things like 650 years in prison, but there's no death penalty despite harming millions. What's fair?

Severely harm the finances of millions / general U.S. economic structure so one can personally gain by hundreds of millions vs. kill 40 or so prostitutes? Hmmm. Is violence the big key to death penalty considerations? What matters most? How many are harmed or suffer (even indirectly), or if it's violence/death that occurs directly?

Edited November 6, 2003 by poind

[aem4162]

I get so tired of all the scandals. People with no trace of a conscience don't think twice about screwing people out of everything they've earned. Sometimes I think that the losers from Enron and MCIWorldcom who stole millions from employees and investors should be at least threatened with the death penalty, kinda like a "you do **** like that and you WILL pay the hard way" type thingy. They, like serial killers, have no remorse and could not care less about their victims while they are stealing the money. I don't know if it would deter anything, but it would be interesting if it were an option.

[Boffa Jones Veteran]

I agree that solitary is the worst type of punishment. Even after a day or two you start to go insane. And i heard as well that the execution is more expensive than keeping them in jail for life.

[dickie]

100% sick

[poind]

I get so tired of all the scandals. People with no trace of a conscience don't think twice about screwing people out of everything they've earned. Sometimes I think that the losers from Enron and MCIWorldcom who stole millions from employees and investors should be at least threatened with the death penalty, kinda like a "you do **** like that and you WILL pay the hard way" type thingy. They, like serial killers, have no remorse and could not care less about their victims while they are stealing the money. I don't know if it would deter anything, but it would be interesting if it were an option.

Must admit that given the masses severely affected by gross, conscious acts for nothing but personal gain that were recently pulled by those at the top of the likes of Enron, Worldcom, etc., the penalties are in no way severe enough.

Their attitudes could read almost exactly like Ridgway's (quoted above), yet they knowingly harmed thousands/millions more without directly, personally, inflicting violent death.

I'm flabberglasted it's taking so long for some good numbers of them to even go to jail, and do find the attitudes they practiced comparable to mass-murderers. Just keep the physical evidence of committing harm to others off your hands and you can get away with a ton, or at least could. :(

[+Fulcrum Subscriber¹]

I took the liberty to look up the argument of Capital Punishment costing more than Imprisonment.

Basically, what that means, is that in order for an execution to take place, a series of appeals may need to be resolved. A defedant may appeal as many times as they want until the Supreme Court precides over the case, after which the cases end. However, the cost of all these cases would cost a bundle.

On the otherside of the story, Imprisonment would cost his feeding and sheltering and all those obvious things, however he would be working in the prison which could offset some costs.

Anyway, If this man has confessed, it is unlikely he'll be appealing the case, thus this execution might be more cost effective.

Finally, I don't see why we should make him suffer via MY TAX Dollars, this is stupid. We're not living in a world where people gain from suffering such as seeing this guy rot in solitary confinement. You'd have to be very strange to gain from that. I prefer we execute him and be done with it. It's just costing us more with solitary confinement if he's not going to appeal a guilty sentence. And frankly, this man is not worthy of my Hate.