Anyone Else Give A **** This Death Row Inmate Suffered?

Goal was to kill him.
He died.
Success...?



Around 10:30 pm, on June 3, 1999, Clayton Lockett, Shawn Mathis and Alfonzo Lockett broke into the home of Bobby Bornt. Bobby was asleep on his couch. Upon entering, the three began to beat and kick Bobby. Bobby recognized Clayton, who was carrying a shotgun. Following his thrashing, Bobby's hands were secured behind him using duct tape. He was also gagged. Clayton, Shawn, and Alfonzo proceeded to search the house, looking for drugs.

During the search, Bobby's friend, Summer Hair, approached his door, which had been left open. One of the men pulled her inside, hit her in the face, and threw her against the wall. Summer was then ordered to call her friend, Stephanie Neiman, who was sitting outside in her pickup truck. When Stephanie entered the residence, she was hit several times and ordered to hand over her keys and the code to disarm the alarm on her pickup.

All three victims were placed in the bedroom of Bobby's nine-month-old son. Alfonzo forced Summer to perform oral sodomy on him before he raped her. When he was done, all three victims had their hands secured behind their backs and tape placed across their mouths. Shawn was told to go and look for a shovel in the garage. After returning with the shovel, Clayton, Bobby, and Bobby's son got into Bobby's pickup. Shawn, Alfonzo, Summer, and Stephanie got into Stephanie's pickup.

Clayton led the way, taking the group to a rural area in Kay County. They stopped along a country road, where Clayton forced Summer to get out of the truck. Clayton raped her and forced her to perform oral sex on him. Summer was returned to the vehicles where she was forced to perform oral sex on Shawn. Shawn was then instructed by Clayton to dig a hole. Stephanie was then taken to the hole and shot by Clayton. The gun jammed and Clayton returned to the vehicles to fix it. During this time, the Bobby and Summer could hear Stephanie screaming and crying. After Clayton fixed the gun, he returned to the hole and shot Stephanie again. Clayton then ordered Shawn and Alfonzo to bury her, even though she was still alive.

Summer, Bobby, and Bobby's son were then returned to Bobby's house. They were warned that if they told anyone what had happened, they would also be killed. Summer and Bobby went to the police the following day. The police recovered Stephanie's body, and arrested Clayton, Shawn, and Alfonzo. Clayton eventually confessed to killing Stephanie, claiming that he chose her because she threatened to go to the police.

In addition to receiving the death penalty for the murder of Stephanie, Clayton also was convicted of conspiracy, first-degree burglary, three counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, three counts of forcible oral sodomy, four counts of first-degree rape, four counts of kidnapping, and two counts of robbery by force and fear. He was sentenced to a total of 2,285 years and 90 days in prison. Shawn Mathis and Alfonzo Lockett were each sentenced to life in prison.

Thoughts?

I'm all torn up about this murderer not dying in a more comfortable way.  Can anyone recommend a good therapist?

U.S. Constitution. No cruel and unusual punishment. Learn it, live it, love it.

R.P. McMurphy wrote:U.S. Constitution. No cruel and unusual punishment.  Learn it, live it, love it.

Isn't capital punishment cruel and unusual? I mean, once you are okay with clearing that bar, now is no time to split hairs. I am against capital punishment because the government has a poor track record of being able to execute (no pun intended) any process effectively. You hesitate allowing idiots like Reid and Pelosi and Boehner to run the country, but you are comfortable with them deciding if you should live or die?

Not me.

MasonGuy wrote:

Isn't capital punishment cruel and unusual?  I mean, once you are okay with clearing that bar, now is no time to split hairs.  I am against capital punishment because the government has a poor track record of being able to execute (no pun intended) any process effectively.  You hesitate allowing idiots like Reid and Pelosi and Boehner to run the country, but you are comfortable with them deciding if you should live or die?

Not me.

First - capital punishment is neither cruel or unusual. Capital punishment is quite usual, from biblical days right through the founding of our country and up to this day. The cruel part pertains to how the punishment is administered. To starve someone to death would be cruel, or any other method than prolongs agony for no reason. But we've been hanging people for centuries and it works in a couple seconds. Same with firing squads. But in our politically correct world, we have to do humane lethal injection to satisfy liberals, and then they complain that it didn't work right and was "cruel and unusual". Go back to hanging these murderers, problem solved.


Oh....Legislators don't decide who lives or dies. That's the judicial system who metes out the punishment.

I'm torn on the use of capital punishment. Truly torn...

On one hand my political/social philosophy would be a contradiction if I supported and justified execution from an entity that already rules through the use of violence. On the other hand I don't rule out personal retribution.

Either way... the fact that our media is focusing on this story just seems to perpetuate the tired, transparent trend lately; Criminals are the poor victims and their actions aren't their own fault.

This guy was a piece of shit, though, no matter how you slice it.

bullwrinkle wrote:First - capital punishment is neither cruel or unusual.  Capital punishment is quite usual, from biblical days right through the founding of our country and up to this day.

How odd that you define 'unusual' from a historical perspective. Today it is extremely unusual among Western democracies. You're welcome to say it's usual because Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia are quite fond of it, but you're setting the bar awfully low. Is female circumcision also not unusual?

I'm totally against the death penalty, and I wish this guy had suffered more. I'm aware of how contradictory that is. It's that sort of issue for me (intellectual/logical reasoning completely at odds with my visceral reaction).

Cym Jim wrote:

How odd that you define 'unusual' from a historical perspective. Today it is extremely unusual among Western democracies. You're welcome to say it's usual because Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia are quite fond of it, but you're setting the bar awfully low. Is female circumcision also not unusual?

How odd that you presume western democracies know better than those of other cultures. And liberals get called elitist, can't imagine why.  

bullwrinkle wrote:

How odd that you presume western democracies know better than those of other cultures.   And liberals get called elitist, can't imagine why. 

Really? You don't think Western democracies have generally more advanced systems of justice than Middle Eastern countries and African dictatorships? That's elitist? Very strange.

bullwrinkle wrote:

How odd that you presume western democracies know better than those of other cultures. And liberals get called elitist, can't imagine why.  

Bullwrinkle thinks we should pattern our country after Middle East countries. How very conservative.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Bullwrinkle thinks we should pattern our country after Middle East countries.  How very conservative.

It's almost as if he didn't think through what he was saying. Nah, couldn't be. I'm sure he'll reply with a insightful put-down and a rofl smilie that will put everything in perspective.

Cym Jim wrote:

Really? You don't think Western democracies have generally more advanced systems of justice than Middle Eastern countries and African dictatorships? That's elitist? Very strange.

You liberals rail against our justice system, claim how unfair it is to minorities, how we are sure to execute innocent people etc.....now all of sudden you claim it's the model for the world to follow. Why don't you and Pervis put your heads together - combined you have almost half a brain, and decide which side of the fence you're on. Then we'll talk some more.

Cym Jim wrote:

It's almost as if he didn't think through what he was saying. Nah, couldn't be. I'm sure he'll reply with a insightful put-down and a rofl smilie that will put everything in perspective.

I hope kaiserpete finds this board. I get the feeling he'd disagree with Bullwrinkle's opinion.

bullwrinkle wrote:

You liberals rail against our justice system, claim how unfair it is to minorities, how we are sure to execute innocent people etc.....now all of sudden you claim it's the model for the world to follow.  Why don't you and Pervis put your heads together - combined you have almost half a brain, and decide which side of the fence you're on.  Then we'll talk some more.

Again, you miss the point. The US justice system should be model. Instead it is among the worst of all Western democracies. It is an embarrassment to this nation, mostly notably for continuing the practice of murdering people, and for treating people of color like animals.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

I hope kaiserpete finds this board.  I get the feeling he'd disagree with Bullwrinkle's opinion.

According to Bully, Sharia Law is sounding awfully good right now.

Cym Jim wrote:
Again, you miss the point. The US justice system should be model. Instead it is among the worst of all Western democracies. It is an embarrassment to this nation, mostly notably for continuing the practice of murdering people, and for treating people of color like animals.

I'll take your whining about capital punishment seriously, when I hear you take seriously the death of a prison guard, inmate, or potential witness, killed by someone sentenced for murder. Not to mention paroled murderers who kill again. You liberals pretend that locking up vicious murderers for "life" is somehow a wonderful solution. Think again, or in your case, think for the first time. Then go teach Pervis how to think for himself.

bullwrinkle wrote:I'm all torn up about this murderer not dying in a more comfortable way.  Can anyone recommend a good therapist?

How predictable.

Modern, progressive, humane countries do not kill their citizens.

GTA Spartan wrote:

How predictable.

Modern, progressive, humane countries do not kill their citizens.

Modern, progressive, humane countries, value the life of innocent people more than the lives of the vicious murderers who kill them.

Did you bother to read how this girl died? Guess not. How predictable.

bullwrinkle wrote:

I'll take your whining about capital punishment seriously, when I hear you take seriously the death of a prison guard, inmate, or potential witness, killed by someone sentenced for murder. Not to mention paroled murderers who kill again. You liberals pretend that locking up vicious murderers for "life" is somehow a wonderful solution. Think again, or in your case, think for the first time. Then go teach Pervis how to think for himself.

Bullwrinkle, the thinker. Let me put your thoughts in a letter that you can print and mail...

Dear Government,

I know I've said that I don't like you, but the truth is that I love you and need you. When you kill citizens who scare me, it makes me feel safe. I don't care how much taxpayer money you have to spend, and it's okay if you occasionally kill someone who didn't really commit the crime they were convicted of. If they were so innocent, they wouldn't have gotten arrested, right? Also, to be honest, hearing about bad guys getting killed gives me a revenge boner. That's not weird, is it?

So please forget every bad thing I've ever said about you. Without my big daddy government, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night.

XOXOXO,
Bullwrinkle

P.S. I'm still angry about taxes!

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Bullwrinkle, the thinker.  Let me put your thoughts in a letter that you can print and mail...

Dear Government,

I know I've said that I don't like you, but the truth is that I love you and need you.  When you kill citizens who scare me, it makes me feel safe.  I don't care how much taxpayer money you have to spend, and it's okay if you occasionally kill someone who didn't really commit the crime they were convicted of.  If they were so innocent, they wouldn't have gotten arrested, right?  Also, to be honest, hearing about bad guys getting killed gives me a revenge boner.  That's not weird, is it?

So please forget every bad thing I've ever said about you.  Without my big daddy government, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night.

XOXOXO,
Bullwrinkle

P.S.  I'm still angry about taxes!

You probably should just focus on trying to express your thoughts in some vaguely coherent manner, before you attempt to guess at what anyone else is thinking.  

bullwrinkle wrote:

You probably should just focus on trying to express your thoughts in some vaguely coherent manner, before you attempt to guess at what anyone else is thinking.  

I'm having more fun organizing your feelings: What if a bad guy gets released?! He might come and get me! Save me, Government!

bullwrinkle wrote:

Modern, progressive, humane countries, value the life of innocent people more than the lives of the vicious murderers who kill them.

Did you bother to read how this girl died? Guess not.  How predictable.

Hey dumbass, I didn't write that he should be set free.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

I'm having more fun organizing your feelings:  What if a bad guy gets released?!  He might come and get me!  Save me, Government!

I have no doubt you have more fun imagining what you mistakenly think I feel. Has to be more fun than attempting to defend the drivel you post here.  

bullwrinkle wrote:

I have no doubt you have more fun imagining what you mistakenly think I feel. Has to be more fun than attempting to defend the drivel you post here.  

I'm basing everything on what you've posted. If you're not scared about bad guys getting out of prison, why did you warn us about the "paroled murderers who kill again"?

Although I'm against big-government capital punishment, I'm glad that my tax dollars will at least keep you from wetting your pants. And I don't even need you to thank me.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

I'm basing everything on what you've posted.

Nope - you can hardly keep straight what you think about any particular issue. You have no chance of guessing what I "feel". Just stick to exactly what I posted. Any inferences you draw will be like virtually everything else you post, laughably wrong.  

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

I'm having more fun organizing your feelings:  What if a bad guy gets released?!  He might come and get me!  Save me, Government!

This victim's family finds the subject to be hysterical too. Why don't you visit them and share a few laughs. Poor Pervis

bullwrinkle wrote:

Nope - you can hardly keep straight what you think about any particular issue.  You have no chance of guessing what I "feel".  Just stick to exactly what I posted.  Any inferences you draw will be like virtually everything else you post, laughably wrong.  

I noticed that you edited the quote so it wasn't so obvious that you dodged my question.  Here it is again:  If you're not scared about bad guys getting out of prison, why did you warn us about the "paroled murderers who kill again"?

It's pretty clear what you feel, my frightened friend; your entire argument is based on fear.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

I noticed that you edited the quote so it wasn't so obvious that you dodged my question.  Here it is again:  If you're not scared about bad guys getting out of prison, why did you warn us about the "paroled murderers who kill again"?

It's pretty clear what you feel, my frightened friend; your entire argument is based on fear.

I didn't "warn" you. You can't be that dense that you didn't already know murderers are routinely paroled. Try again lad, sooner or later you'll finally win at "gotcha".   

bullwrinkle wrote:

I didn't "warn" you. You can't be that dense that you didn't already know murderers are routinely paroled. Try again lad, sooner or later you'll finally win at "gotcha".   

I understand why you don't want to answer. It has to be hard to admit that you're scared. The good news is that you don't have to admit it, since you've made it so obvious.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

I understand why you don't want to answer.  It has to be hard to admit that you're scared.  The good news is that you don't have to admit it, since you've made it so obvious.

While we're at it, let me "warn" you about some other things I guess you don't know about either.  Oh, and they really "scare" me too.

If you walk around outside in the winter with no clothes on, you will freeze to death.

If you drive on the wrong side of the road, you will get in a collision.

If you run with scissors and trip, you will stab yourself and bleed much.

   

bullwrinkle wrote:

While we're at it, let me "warn" you about some other things I guess you don't know about either.  Oh, and they really "scare" me too.

If you walk around outside in the winter with no clothes on, you will freeze to death.

If you drive on the wrong side of the road, you will get in a collision.

If you run with scissors and trip, you will stab yourself and bleed much.

   

Thanks for sharing more of your fears. I hope it helps you.

Someone please explain the fascination with all these experimental ways in which to execute someone?

Hospitals and clinics simply cut the spinal cord with scissors. Millions of customers have been served this way.

Why mess with success?

Symbolism.

I would think a firing squad would be cheapest.

Again, though... it'd have to be a situation where guilt is pretty much a foregone conclusion and it's an incredibly heinous and unusual act. To qualify for execution, in my opinion, you have to eliminate any sort of doubt. Not just reasonable doubt. Even though, something about that still irks me. It's the fact that the state is in charge of this killing... rather than it being retribution for the individuals it affected. Not sure how to square that, per se... and I'm just thinking out loud.

xsanguine wrote:Symbolism.

I would think a firing squad would be cheapest.

Again, though... it'd have to be a situation where guilt is pretty much a foregone conclusion and it's an incredibly heinous and unusual act. To qualify for execution, in my opinion, you have to eliminate any sort of doubt. Not just reasonable doubt. Even though, something about that still irks me. It's the fact that the state is in charge of this killing... rather than it being retribution for the individuals it affected. Not sure how to square that, per se... and I'm just thinking out loud.

So you're OK with someone sentenced to life in prison for murder even if there was some sort of doubt? Just as long as he isn't executed, you can accept that?

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Thanks for sharing more of your fears.  I hope it helps you.

This sounds like the perfect opportunity for you to dedicate a thread to me, just like the ones you did back on WH. How about: "Things I think Bullwrinkle is scared of" thread? It's just a matter of time until your obsession compels you to do that again, why not just get it over with?  

Different board, more rolling emoticons when the responses hit a wall.

Folks who like the idea of death penalties think they will never be in that situation.

Remember when Rush Limbaugh used to rail against drug users and lawyers? Remember how all that changed when he got arrested and was accused of using his hired help to assist him gathering OxyContin without prescriptions? Remember how he hired a lawyer to get him off the hook for jail time by pleading and agreeing to a plea agreement to avoid jail time?

Suddenly the toss'em in jail, throw away the key / one size fits all wasn't going to work.

Same applies here. I don't agree with the death penalty but if we are going to enforce sentences the states should be able to end life with minimum pain.

bullwrinkle wrote:

This sounds like the perfect opportunity for you to dedicate a thread to me, just like the ones you did back on WH. How about: "Things I think Bullwrinkle is scared of" thread? It's just a matter of time until your obsession compels you to do that again, why not just get it over with?  

The best thing about the three warnings you listed is that none of them are true. Maybe I should start a thread that can be bumped every time you post a lie.

bullwrinkle wrote:


So you're OK with someone sentenced to life in prison for murder even if there was some sort of doubt?  Just as long as he isn't executed, you can accept that?

Yes. There is an appeals process.

If someone is found guilty, but there's still some amount of doubt... what is the alternative? Just let them go...?

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

The best thing about the three warnings you listed is that none of them are true.  Maybe I should start a thread that can be bumped every time you post a lie.

Whatever, we can't wait to see your obsession blossom over here.