Robert Lee Thompson

It's the law. If you are involved in a crime with someone else, and your partner in crime kills somebody... you are just as liable for that murder as the guy who pulled the trigger.

What, you think that's unfair? Well, you're wrong. It's very fair because there this thing called a jury. And if you're so involved in the act that the jury thinks you should get the death penalty, well there you go.

But what if the actual shooter only got life? So what? Maybe the shooter didn't really want to shoot, but only did so because you were using some influence or otherwise encouraging the him to shoot the victim. Again, the jury is there to hear the facts and if they find him guilty, decide if the death penalty is applicable.

In Robert Lee Thompson's case, here are the facts:
---
On December 5, 1996, Thompson, armed with a .25 caliber semiautomatic, and Sammy Butler, armed with a .38 caliber revolver, entered a 7-Evenings Food Store in Houston.

Thompson pointed his pistol at store clerk Mubarakali Meredia, who was at the counter, and told him to open the cash register and hand over all of the money. Thompson shot Meredia in the abdomen when he did not move quickly enough. Thompson also shot at Meredia’s cousin, Mansor Bhai Rahim Mohammed, who also worked at the shop, when Rahim began running toward the rear of the store. At Butler’s trial, the State offered evidence that Butler also shot at Rahim, and threatened several other customers.

Thompson then shot Meredia three more times as he lay on the floor. Thompson ordered Meredia to get up and get the money for him. Meredia did so. Then Thompson put his pistol to Meredia’s neck and pulled the trigger. Nothing happened because Thompson had run out of bullets. Thompson hit Meredia on the head with the butt of his gun and struck him with the cash register drawer. Nonetheless, Meredia survived.

Thompson took the money and ran out of the store, while Butler grabbed a stack of lottery tickets and followed behind Thompson. Thompson jumped into the driver’s seat of their car, while Butler got into the passenger’s seat, rolled down his window, and fired two shots at Rahim who had run to the front door. One bullet hit Rahim in the chest, and he died.

Based upon this evidence, the jury convicted applicant of capital murder. During the punishment phase, the jury heard evidence that this robbery-murder was only one part of a robbery-murder spree during which applicant, as the triggerman, had committed two additional capital murders.

Based upon all of the evidence submitted, the jury found that applicant would pose a future risk of danger and that there were no mitigating circumstances that would call for a life sentence. The judge sentenced him to death.
---

The dude is bad. It takes a certain kind of someone to shoot people, and he shot people like it was nothing. He's killed people. He only wants off because his accomplice didn't get convicted of capital murder, but then his accomplice wasn't shooting everything that moved either. Thompson was in the lead, he wanted to make a bloody statement, and boy did he. Does he deserve the death penalty. HELL YES!

And then I get an email today:

The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles today voted to recommend that the death sentence of Robert Thompson be commuted to life. Thompson's execution is scheduled for tomorrow, Thursday, November 19. Governor Perry will be deciding tonight or tomorrow morning whether to accept the recommendation and grant clemency to Thompson. Perry could accept or reject the recommendation from the BPP.

Call the Governor and leave a voice message at 512 463 1782 or email him through his website at http://governor.state.tx.us/contact. Urge him to accept the recommendation of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to grant Robert Thompson clemency and commute his sentence to life.

Thompson was sentenced to death under the Law of Parties even though he did not kill the victim. Thompson's accomplice fired the bullet that killed the victim. The accomplice received life in prison.

During the 2009 session of the Texas Legislature, the Texas House of Representatives passed a bill that would have banned executions of people convicted solely under the Law of Parties for people who do not actually kill anyone. The bill died in the Senate, but its passage in the House showed that many legislators want Texas to stop executing people convicted under the Law of Parties.

If Thompson's execution is commuted, then other people sentenced to death under the Law of Parties could also be commuted in the future, including Jeff Wood.

WTF? Umm, no... ah HELL NO! This is SO misleading. It makes it look like Thompson was just standing around, maybe holding the money bag while his accomplice was calling the shots and killed someone. It was THOMPSON who was shooting everyone, he's definitely deserving of the death penalty. No doubt about it. At the time of Thompson's trial, he had three, THREE, capital murder trials pending.

Butler, his accomplice, fired two shots and was unlucky enough to have fired the fatal shot while they were driving off. Guilty? Of course. Enough for the death penalty... well, when you compare Butler with the depravity of Thompson, probably not, so the jury gave him life in prison.

I believe anti-death penalty people would have a stronger leg to stand on if they limited their pleas to cases that don't involve these monsters who have absolutely no regard for any human life, including their own. But, I also believe in forgiveness, and I hope Thompson somehow got to know Jesus and has accepted Him as his saviour before he goes to the death chamber.

Corruption by Country Index

CPI 2009 Table/2009/cpi/surveys_indices/policy_research

Wow. This is interesting. The most corrupt country, #180 out of 180 in the list, is of course... Somalia! Piracy, no real government, not even sure if they really qualify as being a country anymore, but there they are at the bottom of the list.

But wait, there's more!

Just above Somalia, #179 is... Afghanistan! That's right, Afghanistan just barely beat out piracy. #178 is Myanmar (Burma) which is headed by a junta and oppresses people... and they are LESS corrupt than Afghanistan! #176 is Sudan, genocide in the work and all, beat out Afghanistan.

What to make of this, as far as Afghanistan? In simple terms, it looks to me like the government is more concerned about getting what they can get right now. They're being coddled, they know it won't last forever, and so they're taking what they can get while the getting is good, instead of trying to stabilize their country. ...just barely less corrupt than Somalia... wow.

Iran is #168 of 180, slightly more corrupt than Haiti. Nice job with the revolution of yours, way to take things into your own hands.

Venezuela is #162 of 180. Chavez... not surprising. Still, they have some hot women there.

Russia is #146, slightly more corrupt than Kenya. It's funny because a friend at work, who is from Kenya, has told me that about how bad corruption is in his country. And Russia is even worse... wow.

Nigeria is #130, which is a little surprising. "I'm a Nigerian prince with lots of money, but I need you to give me some money so I can claim my wealth and I'll gladly pay you Tuesday." Strangely, I figured Nigeria to be much lower in the list.

Mexico is #89... that might be about right. It's pretty well known you have to bribe the police there if you don't want to go to jail. A relative of mine who lives in Del Rio, really nice guy, somehow got arrested in Mexico and it was a little like holding him for ransom. Once they get their money, you're free to go. You also have to bribe officials if you want anything done.

China is #79. There, if you're caught or exposed as being corrupt or taking bribes... they take you out back and shoot you, unless you kill yourself first. That said, isn't it strange, in philosophical terms, that a socialist society can have corruption?

Cuba is #61... this surprises me a little. They are definitely more communistic than China, so that they beat China in terms of corruption isn't surprising, but I thought they'd be even less corrupt. Fidel Castro, in an interview, showed off some old checks the US has given him over the years for the use for Gitmo. He simply refuses to take money from the US. So, corruption takes all kinds of forms, but it still seems a little strange.

Israel is #32. US is #19. Canada is #8 along with Australia, founded by criminals. Ironic eh?

Afghanistan Strategists Turn Focus to Pakistan - NYTimes.com

Afghanistan Strategists Turn Focus to Pakistan - NYTimes.com: "As the president traveled to Asia, his national security adviser, Gen. James L. Jones, was quietly sent to Islamabad, its capital.

His message, officials said, was that the new American strategy would work only if Pakistan broadened its fight beyond the militants attacking its cities and security forces and went after the groups that use havens in Pakistan for plotting and carrying out attacks against American troops in Afghanistan, as well as support networks for Al Qaeda."

---

Today's forecast, a .10% (yes, that is a point in there) chance on Pak being able to do all that. That means, this so called "plan" of ours is more like a recipe for failure. Yes, that's obvious, so why present and publicly give this plan... to blame Pak when it fails or to pressure Pak to do it and then we take all the credit. Considering how much money we give Pak, it's not a bad deal for them if they decide to participate and manage to somehow succeed (see the .10% above).

This simply can't be the real plan. The real plan must be to give McChrystal the troops he asked for, and rely on him to win. In other words, nothing is really changing, and Obama waited all this time for... nothing. Maybe he really wanted to study the subject, and there's nothing wrong with that. Hopefully he will now trust his admirals and generals a little more.
--
"Every time Mr. Obama declares that the United States will not have an “open-ended” military commitment in Afghanistan, he fuels a second concern of the powerful Pakistani military and intelligence establishment, which believes the United States commitment is fleeting.

It is a concern that some of them say justifies Pakistan’s continuing ties to the militants who fight American troops in Afghanistan."

--

I feel your pain. However, terrorists left to live within Pak will fester. It would be better to eliminate them than let the wound spread. If Pak provides a safe haven for terrorists, then Pak may be the next Afghanistan.

White House to Begin Push on Immigration Overhaul in 2010 - NYTimes.com

White House to Begin Push on Immigration Overhaul in 2010 - NYTimes.com: "Laying out the administration’s bottom line, she said it will argue for a “three-legged stool” that includes enacting tougher enforcement laws against illegal immigrants and the people who hire them, and streamlining the system for legal immigration, but also what she called a “tough and fair pathway to earned legal status.”"

---

Yeah... so you expect illegal immigrants who snuck into this country to avoid the tough and fair way currently in place, to take a new tough and fair pathway to become legal? Sounds a little... I dunno... insane maybe? Yeah, insane. More likely, the "tough and fair pathway" is actually going to be an "easy and free highway" to legal status, which is totally unfair to those who came here without breaking the law.

Maybe if there was a fine involved? You know, for breaking the law. So, instead of deportation, you pay your fine, give your address and all that stuff and go through a process. If your address or other information is faked, then you get deported with no future chance at becoming legal. The amount of the fine could be scaled on income, on whether they paid income taxes, etc. But a fine is to be had no matter what. If you don't pay the fine, then you get deported, unless there is a just cause.

The fines should go to Social Security. No, not border patrol or anything else, just SS. SS should be a locked box that can receive money, and only give out money to those who are eligible to receive it. Not that this will save SS, it'll just keep it alive long enough for me to get my share after I retire in like 15 years. :)

Terrorist Paralyzed from Waist Down

So, WHEEL his butt into the death chamber... sheesh.

Yale Dismemberment

Police Say Suspect in Yale Killing Hid Bloody Tissues - NYTimes.com

Blood here, blood there, her blood everywhere... yet she died of strangulation?

Possibly, before strangling her, the psycho beat her, cut her up, etc. before finally choking her to death. I think that's something more likely in fiction than reality, as long as it is correct that she indeed died by strangulation.

I think the psycho killed her in a fit of rage for something probably really stupid and petty, then self preservation kicked in and he had to hide the body. So how do you get a body into a tight place as efficiently as possible? Dismemberment.

How else would blood have gotten everywhere? Why else to make sure that the area below the sink is spotless?

The guy must have really despised her, or is a total sociopath. Probably the latter more than the former. Murder is bad enough, a sociopath who murders is even worse, and a sociopath who almost gets away with it, is almost the worst, and of course the sociopath who gets away with it, is just downright scary shit.

Nationalized Abortions

It looks like there's a new hiccup in plans for public health care. Yes, abortions.

There really shouldn't be any debate about it. Right now, abortions aren't funded by the government, and that hasn't been an issue. If you want an abortion, and can live with that decision, then you can have one if you can afford it. They're not so expensive that there's been an outcry... so why are we now seeing this as an issue?

Point blank, do not give out free abortions as part of the public health care insurance.

Don't try to fix something that isn't broken. If a woman wants an abortion badly enough, she can up with the money to have it done. I certainly don't want to help fund it. And if you give them for free, then women will definitely use it as form of birth control since it'll be even cheaper than using rubbers.

Real Life 40 Year Old Virgin - Mass Murderer

Fort Hood Gunman Gave Signals Before His Rampage - NYTimes.com: "Though Major Hasan told his cousins that he planned to marry sometime this year, he was not known to have ever had a girlfriend, relatives said"

---

There you have it. The true reason behind all reasons why this guy snapped and turned so violent. Seriously.

Why was he so religious? Well, since he's never been laid, it was a good excuse to those that inquire.

Seething rage? Years of sexual frustration, wondering why he couldn't get laid, etc., will do that to a guy.

Becoming a psychiatrist? Some nuts tend to want to know why they're nuts.

Seeing a sort of honor in suicide bombers? Very akin to why he became so religious, except that here there's the martyr aspect, fulfilling a purpose beyond himself, a mission of sorts that required him to put aside things like breaking his virginity.

OR... if he wasn't a virgin, but had a whore once or simply never had a normal relationship with a woman, or was gay, then that meant he was a profound hypocrite, remember his religiousness, and was torn from inside out.

I think he was a virgin, he lacked what they call, "social skills." A fish out of water, of sorts, that delved into his studies and religion instead to the complete exclusion of getting laid, or any other social activities.

All this could have been avoided if he had gotten laid. Think about this women. The next time I make a move on you, don't be dismissive, think of the good that all the lives you might be saving. Sexual frustration kills. Guys, spread the word. :)

Catholicism and Conservative Values

Maine Voters Repeal Law Allowing Gay Marriage - NYTimes.com: "The Catholic Church was a leading supporter of the repeal campaign, even asking parishes to pass a second collection plate at Sunday mass to help the cause."

No doubt, the Catholic Church seems to be one of few religions that will not bend on their values. Bravo!

It's simply amazing to me that Protestant churches are moving toward the practice of turning a blind eye on not just "simple" or "regular" sins we all commit, but for one that Paul mentions in letter to the Corninthians, who had a lot of issues including sexual immorality.

Generally, we're all wicked and unworthy to inherit the Kingdom. But we can have forgiveness through faith. But with faith there is also action. And if you continue to be sexually immoral, that's not just homo acts but can be a lot of things, then were you truly repentant? If your nose, hand, whatever, offends you, then cut it off. That means, cut it out, stop it, don't do it anymore. Exercise self control like a human instead of going off of instinct like an animal. Adultry, stop doing it. Prostitute, stop it. Flee from it, don't do it. Just say no... whatever it takes.

But no, the Anglican church allows, and Methodist contemplated, gay ministers. So, Protestant churches are shaking, the ground is not stable. Where's the rock? Apparently, it stayed with the Catholics and wasn't extended to Protestants.

All churches experience difficulties. But this issue one that should not be. Practicing homosexual ministers... "Are you fucking insane" would be a good reply. Or maybe just laugh at the suggestion since it was obviously a joke, right? If not, then maybe a reply of, "Get the fuck out of here you dumbass." Maybe without the expletives, but with the general meaning none-the-less.

So my dad asked me if I had found or was still looking for a church. I told him yeah, and that I was considering going Catholic. He thought I was joking. Then he wondered why I was considering that after laughing at me. "I'll tell you why, because the Catholic church is the only church right now where I know they're not going to allow gays or any of that other crap that's going on." His counter really wasn't on point, but he mentioned that catholics has problems with gay priests. That's not on point because they weren't open about it, the church didn't condone it, etc., whereas protestant churches seem to be shifting from not only condoning it, but encouraging it.

The Methodists do not allow gay ministers or gay marriage, for now, but they do say that they allow gays in the congregation. Well, I doubt anyone is naive enough to think gays never attended a Methodist church before, but now the church is advertising it... "Come on in, be open with your queerness, we don't care" is the message. That's not right by me, that's an acceptance of sexual immorality, lowering the standard instead of raising it.

So what's a practicing gay person to do to get saved? Same thing as a practicing thief, same thing as a practicing adulterer, same thing as anyone else who is praticing a certain sin all the time. This doesn't bar you from going to church, church is inclusive. But the church should become a den of thieves, a whorehouse, or gay club, it should stand for what is moral and right, and YOU need to be the one to change your ways.

Oh yeah, my dad also said, "You need to find a spirit filled church." I told him the Catholics believe in the spirit, that all Christians believe in the Spirit. But I knew what he was talking about, he was talking about people blabbing in tongues, which I find to be nothing but disrupting if there's no interpretation. There needs to be order in the church, Paul said as much and I agree. And the only thing worse than no interpretation after someone speaks in tongues, is when TWO interpretations come from it, totally different. Yeah, all things are possible, but come on, I can discern. So yeah, it was fake, and I don't like fake.

I forget how exactly the issue came up, but I said, matter-of-factly, that there was a time when you were either Catholic, or you weren't a Christian. My dad disagreed. ?!?!?!?!? Umm... so I had to tell my dad some basic history and he relented. My dad is no dummy, btw, but he's more engineer than anything else, and I went to a Christian college, and took more than the required religious courses since I've always found the subject most interesting.

So, yeah, I'm thinking about Catholic, I'm also thinking Lutheran - Missouri Synod. I'll take action eventually, but I like to think first. Weigh my options. I don't know where I'll end up, but I know it will be with a morally strong place.