Gun Death: Cambridge

So this story is all over the local news

It has been more than a week since 60-year-old Paul Wilson was found dead inside Danehy Park in Cambridge and investigators are still looking for clues.

District Attorney Marian Ryan and police spoke about the case at a community meeting at the Andrew Peabody School Thursday night. They said authorities are still unsure whether the attack was planned. Investigators have not identified a possible motive.

“We have no information at this point that suggests it was other than random,” Ryan said to a crowd of more than 150 people, according to The Boston Globe.

…Police found Wilson suffering from “blunt force trauma to his head,” Ryan said. He was transported to Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and was pronounced dead at 10:18 p.m.

Wilson was 6 feet, 6 inches tall, and often traveled through the park to get to and from work, police said. Police do not believe Wilson was robbed because he had multiple possessions on him when emergency responders found him.

It’s a very strange case, man walks to work every day through a public park (something very similar to a commute I once had) and one night when walking home some monster came and caved his head in.

Of course Cambridge and neighboring Boston it is all but impossible for people with political connections to get a carry permit, hey but no gun was used, so no “Gun Death”.

Also given that it has been so long and there aren’t any leads, I have my doubt the monster that did it will ever be caught….at least until they decide to prey on their fellow man. But why would you need a gun in a City and State with such good gun laws, right?

Also nearly unrelated, when looking up the story to cite Google also gave me this story, not from Cambridge Massachusetts, but Cambridgeshire England

A thug who nearly decapitated a dementia sufferer with a rake is a child killer living under a pseudonym, it’s emerged.

Stephen Chafer was just 17 when he sexually assaulted and stabbed to death three-year-old Lorraine Holt.

He was jailed for life but the Parole Board has been condemned this week for giving him to chance to reoffend.

The dad, now known as Stephen Leonard, was released from jail after 23 years in 2002, returned to prison in 2013 for arson – but then released again on licence in 2017.

And this month Chafer was convicted of trying to kill Fay Mills, a 60-year-old dementia sufferer, in Peterborough in another frenzied attack in a row over garden tools.

So this piece of shit rapes and murders (note with a knife, not a gun) a Three-year-old girl, and gets life in Prison….but is released at age 40 (my age, so one can argue still in his prime), and within a year is sent BACK to prison for Arson.

And what boggles the mind is after that they again grant him Parole, and now he attempts to murder a 60 year old over neighborly disagreement, and theoretically he could still be released again, and given how the “Justice System” obviously works there I’d be suprised if he doesn’t go free again, and hopefully when he’s free he’s too old and frail to cause much harm, but does any resonable person think the monster can be removed from this Man?

And here lies the core of the “Gun Death Files” there are people who are just dangerous. A Man who would rape and murder a small child is so beyond any normal human behavior I find it difficult to ascribe malice to his actions. Somebody who would even CONSIDER doing this is no different than a coyote snatching a kid for a meal.

The idea of having a “Life” Sentence that can be reduced seems a bit of a misnomer, but then having somebody get early release and then be convicted of such a serious crime and EVER seeing the light of day is a fucking travesty. What the hell did they think would happen when they let this monster go?

Really he never should have seen the light of day, and personally this is why I’m so pro death penalty. There are monsters who walk among us, and when they make their presence known they should be removed from society just to keep us safe, but unlike some death penalty proponants, I don’t see it a justice or revenge thing, but really an issue of Humanity.

He was 17 years old and he raped and murdered a Three-Year-Old. You can argue that 17 is just a minor, and I think we were all doing things our older and wiser selves consider stupid now, but that isn’t even in the same ballpark. He’s broken, and modern medicine can’t fix that kind of broken, and we have clear examples here that his kind of broken is a danger to all who are around him.

He raped and killed a little girl, he burned his unit in a 9-unit Apartment building down, and now he’s going back up the river for nearly killing a woman while arguing over a damn rake. He’s a monster, and should NEVER have contact with other people. Now think about that, that means if we aren’t going to euthanize him, it means locking him up until he dies on his own (A Life Sentence really is just a lazy Death Sentence), which in itself is tragic, and reminds of of the Medieval Oubliettes where prisoners were simply locked up and left to die. But it is also tragic in that he will STILL have contact with other people, Jailers, who are good people doing good work, and other prisoners, who by definition aren’t as good a people, but at the same time in no way deserving to be harmed or maimed by a violent creature.

I just think a life sentence is more humane if we just come to terms with WHY we stick people in prison and what it means when we say Life Without Parole.

Sorry I got a little preachy but that second story really pissed me off.

This entry was posted in Gun Death?. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Gun Death: Cambridge

  1. Beans says:

    I actually think “Life without Parole” is much more cruel than making someone dance the electric boogaloo or hang or any other actual execution death. Heck, LwoP is crueler than a guillotine. Or being staked out and allowed to die of exposure. At least the death (if enacted in a timely fashion, not 20-30 years down the road) is pretty much final.

    Now the real issue I have is the State’s or Country’s insistence on plea bargaining and the whole parole process, which is totally broken here and overseas in (formerly) Great Britain.

    Plea Bargaining and taking reduced sentencing and dropping whole charges in order to get a plea has turned the whole judicial system into a combination of bartering and casino gambling. The real thugs know how to play the system so they don’t ever get the penalties that they deserve. Seen it, seen major drug dealers and thugs and murderers plea horrid crimes down to nothing in the prosecutor’s holy search for conviction rates.

    As to the whole Parole system. Someone can get sentenced to Death, get it commuted to Life Without Parole, and then qualify (wtf?) for Life with Parole, which then qualifies them for Parole and then we have murderers and the worst of the worst out on Parole to reoffend and then do we put them back in for violating their Parole to finish out their first sentence? No, not usually, we just re-sentence them and start, as with the butt-pimple in the second example, the process all over them, because these individuals who have rejected society and the right to be a functioning member of the society, have more ‘rights’ than we normals or especially the victims (not just the primary victim of their debased and inhumane attacks, but the secondary victims being the families and close circle of acquaintances and the tertiary victim being the Rule of Law.)

  2. Alpheus says:

    I don’t agree that it’s impossible for such a monster to be redeemed — it’s happened — but I *also* don’t believe that it’s the State’s responsibility to try to seek redemption for the prisoner. That’s a personal affair, and considering that it often involves literally coming to Jesus, it can even be observed that, while the State can facilitate it (by providing access to ministers), the State cannot *force* it, without violating the separation of Church and State. Heck, the State cannot force it without violating the conscience (or lack thereof) of the prisoner in question — or trust that the prisoner will fake redemption, just to get out of prison.

    I am perfectly fine with permanently locking up someone who did something horrible, who nonetheless found redemption while in prison. Someone who did something horrible still has to face the consequences of what they did. Repenting isn’t a “get out of jail free” card.

    Some people have made the case that the death penalty is bad, because we take away the possibility of redemption of the individual. If this were truly the concern of God, though, you’d think that he’d have said something about it in the Old or New Testaments, or perhaps even in scripture in addition to those (as a Latter-day Saint, I also believe the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants are scripture, for example). But it doesn’t exist, in no small part because an individual who is executed nonetheless *still* has an opportunity for redemption after dying, because we’re still alive after we die.

    Granted, many people believe we go straight to heaven or hell right after we die, but is it really the responsibility of the State to make or facilitate that judgement? When an individual commits murder, that individual takes on the risk of final judgement *immediately*, and whether the individual dies of sickness, or of accident, or of execution shortly afterwards — that is the risk the individual takes when getting murdered.

    Sorry for the rant, particularly when the TL;DR version is merely “I believe monsters can be redeemed, but that doesn’t excuse us from seeking justice.”

    • Alpheus says:

      I should also add that there’s something deeply annoying about claiming we should get rid of the death penalty because *sometimes* the person being executed is innocent, considering

      (1) This ignores the cases where the individual is *clearly* guilty of the crime in question — why is executing such a person such a concern?

      (2) What about the poor innocent “schmucks” who aren’t convicted of murder, or even of something serious, but are forced into a plea bargain that gives the individual a criminal record for the rest of their lives, and takes a portion of their fortune and freedom to boot? Why are we more concerned with getting innocent convicted murderers off of death row, but not concerned about all the other innocent people “convicted” of something? Shouldn’t we be more concerned about reforming police and court proceedings than the final outcome and punishment?

  3. Easy - says:

    I actually think “Life without Parole” is much more cruel than making someone dance the electric boogaloo or hang or any other actual execution death. Heck, LwoP is crueler than a guillotine. Or being staked out and allowed to die of exposure. At least the death (if enacted in a timely fashion, not 20-30 years down the road) is pretty much final.
    Now the real issue I have is the State’s or Country’s insistence on plea bargaining and the whole parole process, which is totally broken here and overseas in (formerly) Great Britain.
    Plea Bargaining and taking reduced sentencing and dropping whole charges in order to get a plea has turned the whole judicial system into a combination of bartering and casino gambling. The real thugs know how to play the system so they don’t ever get the penalties that they deserve. Seen it, seen major drug dealers and thugs and murderers plea horrid crimes down to nothing in the prosecutor’s holy search for conviction rates.
    As to the whole Parole system. Someone can get sentenced to Death, get it commuted to Life Without Parole, and then qualify (wtf?) for Life with Parole, which then qualifies them for Parole and then we have murderers and the worst of the worst out on Parole to reoffend and then do we put them back in for violating their Parole to finish out their first sentence? No, not usually, we just re-sentence them and start, as with the butt-pimple in the second example, the process all over them, because these individuals who have rejected society and the right to be a functioning member of the society, have more ‘rights’ than we normals or especially the victims (not just the primary victim of their debased and inhumane attacks, but the secondary victims being the families and close circle of acquaintances and the tertiary victim being the Rule of Law.)

Leave a Reply to Easy - Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *