For appeals, you mean? There's always something new coming out. The lawyers always uncover some little smidgen of a technicality and want a whole new trial as a result. That's why the death penalty costs so much to maintain - they are typically paid for through taxes.

The process is that long because the US is a jut nation, and due process must take place. Even for this pig (yes, pig...and insult to Islam for him..) he will be given his mandatory appeals, as he should, before they fill his veins with American vengeance...

He had a fair trial. He ought to get an appeal. The other right in that document though is a "speedy" trial and this process is certainly not speedy.

Define "speedy"? He killed how many people? Wounded how many more? Look it up...a shitload of people...I think the **victims** deserved to have a trial that was thorough and made the case.

That's actually the argument I typically use, krellin. The appeals are made for the benefits of the defense, but the victims are forgotten. They shouldn't have to wait 15 years for closure.

Innocent people getting put to death though is a horrific thought and happens too much. Obviously in some cases the guilt is undeniable, but the law can't make exceptions in it's protection against putting innocents to death

And, by the way, speedy in my opinion is as quick as possible. Don't wait for new evidence that may or may not come out. Once the case is prepared, call the judge, call the court to order, and get the appeal over with.

There's not just an empty courtroom sitting around waiting for it to happen. This isn't Night Court. Courts are often scheduled several months in advance...last time I went to court, I had 30 days to decide if I wanted to go to court, then I was told they would schedule it within the next three weeks...and by that, they meant "decide when it was going to be", and that was likely to be 2-3 months from when it was scheduled. There's a lot that goes into a legal proceeding, and while speedy is the desired outcome, it's contrasted against the old method of locking someone up forever because you knew they wouldn't be found guilty when/if it went to court.

Some people will waive their appeals rights, and I would imagine there being a possibility that this guy will. I know Aileen Wuornos (sp?) did, at least her later ones.

I get that the whole court/legal system is long and complicated and I don't advocate limiting rights for the sake of speed, but 10 years is quite a lot of time. I think 2-4 would be understandable what with all the other cases and legal actions being taken, but 10? I mean doesn't that seem a bit of a stretch even with all the appeals being acted upon? If anyone has a law degree here please elaborate because I'd like to understand this better. After all, can't have a reasonable opinion on something you don't know much about.

bo_sox48, trials often take so long to happen because defense attorneys want it that way. It means more time for them to prepare and, maybe, more time for their client to be free on bail. That, and the docket schedule, is a big part of why things take so long.

As for this piece of shit murderer, I actually hope he never actually gets executed. He wanted most to be a martyr, we should deny him that.

see now, i have to concur with invictus here.

I think think this fuck psychiatrist murder should get life. I mean just to spite him and his.

No virgins for you f-wad.

but whatever