2. You may want to consider following the link to check out: Save Teresa Lewis
*STOP. Do not read the rest of the directions before you read the articles. I don't want my directions to color your opinion. Go read the article(s) now!*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. This is a complicated issue for a myriad of reasons. The article seems to indicate that the primary reason that opponents of Lewis' execution object is her gender. Also cited are speculation about her mental capacity and possible manipulation by one of her conspirators. Again, controversial issues such as the death penalty are intense. Take some time to mull these ideas over before responding to the prompt. Figure out where you stand.
4. In your comment, follow each of the following steps:
a) Choose one factor mentioned in the article (gender, mental ability, accomplice manipulation) and defend or challenge its relevance in relation to the death penalty. Should this factor have played a part in Lewis' trial and ultimate execution? Explain your rationale with logical examples. Note: You are not arguing for or against the death penalty.
b) What is the approximate ratio of men to women who receive the death penalty?
What does this number say about the justice system?
What does this say about the number of men who commit serious crimes versus women? Why is this happening? Analyze the situation. Postulate as to the possible reasons.
--> Do not skip any of these steps.
*Deadline: Monday, September 27th at midnight
5. Respond to at least two of your classmates' comments by completing the following steps:
a) State whether you agree or disagree with the writer's standpoint
b) Provide any three concrete examples of your choice to support your decision.
c) End your comment with a question for the writer to consider.
--> Do not skip any of these steps.
*Deadline: Friday, October 1st at midnight6. As far as grammar, spelling, propriety, etc., your comments as a whole are improving. Keep it up! Your blog posts are being used as a means to enhance your grade. Continually posting reflective comments and doing so on-time can bump up your grade a few percentage points. It can also do the opposite should you not take this assignment seriously.
a) How I see it, I believe that her gender, "mental disability" or even her gender played a part in the trial. First of all, her gender played absolutely no part in this. It's not like the jury or the judges would have given her the death penalty just for being a female. The ratio of women to men executed is approximately 1:100 and I can almost assure you that out of the 1200 men given the penalty at least a quarter of them did almost the same thing Lewis was accused and guilty of. Second, why is it that when someone is on the edge of receiving the death penalty a "mental disability" comes out of the blue? Faking mental disabilities is a way that society has learned to do very well. Many accusations, no matter how small or how big, are lifted because the accused is ,for example, afraid of red sweaters and it turns out her husband was wearing one so she gave him 27 stabs. Therefore, the accused presents this at a court and suddenly she is "off the hook." Accomplice manipulation wouldn't really matter since Lewis bribed the accomplices through sex and money and the men were very stupid to fall. The three of them were to blame. Lewis deserved the heavy punishment of the law, even if she was a woman.
ReplyDeleteb) As stated above the ratio of women to men to receive the death penalty is approximately 1:100. This should not say anything about the American Justice System. This just proves that men are easily provoked to do something that puts their lives in peril. How often do we see a woman on the news that committed such a crime that should be tried for the death penalty? Not very often is there. Men are usually put on the news for armed robberies, murder and rapings. Women are not often put in the front page for something like this.
A) Gender had no role in this, woman fall at the mercy of the court just as men do when it come to sentences such as the death penalty. But because society today holds on to the ideal that women are fragile and therefore deserve more leeway than men when it comes to hanice crimes, the courts are hesistant to bring down a hammer. Justice does not descriminate genders, so why should the rest of us? In cases of domestic disputes, men may be the most heard of being at fault, but that not necesssarily mean women are never the cause or the more violent or the two. If anything, the way she used her gender should be used against her rather than for her benefit. Women are just as bad as men, if not sometimes worse. She is woman who generally manipulated men to get what she wanted, and there is proof of this.
ReplyDeleteB) (As Maria provided earlier) The ratio of women to men who recieved the death penalty is approximately 1:100, showing that gender may play a major role in the punishments of female criminals. This does not necessarily help to draw conclusions when constrastin male crimes to female crimes, as we notice that men and women can do equally wrong. I believe that the justice system focuses way too much on small factors such as gender, rather focusing on the bigger issues at hand. Because of her, two men are dead, so why defend her? Why give her any more of a chance than the men who cause or do the same?
3. I feel that no one manipulated her and it was purely her decision alone to kill her husband and son. She did deserve the death penalty.
ReplyDelete4.
(a) I highly doubt that her accomplices manipulated her. On the contrary I feel that she manipulated her accomplices. This just contributes to her recieving the death penatly. This did play a part in the execution and all it did to her accomplices was grant them a life in prison. The articles say that she began an affair with one accomplice and had sex with the other. She was also going to arranged sex with Fuller and her daughter who was sixteen at the time, in the parking lot. That is something that I consider to be something totally unacceptable especially for a mother. The men only killed her husband and son because of the sex Lewis' provided. She only did it for money of her son's insurance policy, that is very selfish of her and degrading. She deserved the death penatly for committing such a horrible crime, as well a sin.
(b) Men have the tendency of committing crimes more often than women do. The ratio could be 1:150 and the one being women. The federal government always has softer side when it comes to women even though they commit the same types of crimes. That is pretty sexist of the government to give women an easier time than men. This is probably due to the fact that many government officials are men instead of women. Just because we are women doesn't necessarily mean we need to be punished less than men do. If it's the same crime, then it should be the same punishment. The justice system is pretty unfair when it comes to gender and the death penalty is a prime example of that.
Gender, for years & years there has been the idea that men are far superior to women. Women were supposed to fit a specific role & had no other purpose than to be kind, nurturing mothers & wives while the men usually provide for the family. Ideas do change, women today are treated far better & allowed more rights than they once were. But there are those exceptions where women are still treated as lesser than men. This article though, has nothing to do with that stereotype of women just being brushed aside while the men take part in serious issues. Teresa Lewis had no advantage. The Judge & Jury sentenced her as they saw fit. And as you can imagine this caused a great out cry by the public. The article title in itself “Virginia puts woman to death; rare US female execution” refers to the gender of the criminal. But why does this matter? A criminal whether they be male or female is still a criminal. Now I do agree that she did not deserve the death penalty but I am not basing that opinion on gender. Women, like men are equally capable of committing crimes, so I don’t see her gender to have any specific relevance on whether or not she was to be sentenced to death.
ReplyDeleteMore men are given the death penalty as opposed to women. But why is that is it because women don't commit crimes as frequently as men do? I doubt it, women are seen as less threatening. It's not in a “women's nature” to be violent or kill. In away it is as though the original role of women in society has only changed to a certain degree. It seems as though women are still expected to be the delicate, nurturing mothers who stay home cook, clean, raise children & never speak out of turn. This, is highly inaccurate. Times have changed and so have gender roles, why is it then that they still have such a strong affect on our society? Women account for only one in forty-nine (2%) death sentences imposed at the trial level; & as I had previously stated this is not because women are far less capable of committing crime. Now I am sure that certain crimes are committed most frequently by men, but gender should still have no affect on whether or not someone gets the death penalty or not. I think that this shows that our Justice System is flaud, most people are bias so of course some decisions made by judges & juries will show partiality to some extent. We can't expect the Justice System to be fair all the time, if anything it's corrupt. People aren't perfect so of course no system established by people will ever be perfect.
Killing is against the law, and it is also against one of the Ten Commandments. I am not an overly religious person, but I do believe in God, and I also believe that if someone kills, they are sinners. They should repent until the day they die, and feel how much pain they had caused that family. Killing hurts the victim’s family physically and mentally. Even if you lived to be a million years old, you could never bring that person back to life. Although it’s bad to kill someone by yourself, it’s even worse to have someone help you. I am challenging the point of view of the “accomplice manipulation” factor. I personally believe that this factor should have played a big role in her trial-execution. Just before she died, she asked to see her stepdaughter and say she was sorry. In my opinion, that was a very wrong thing to do. Kathy had just lost her dad and brother, and then their killer comes to her to say she’s sorry. When you kill someone, that is a very bad thing, but if you promise someone sex and money to kill, that is the biggest sin in the universe. What I want to know is: What was going through Teresa’s mind? What made her think that killing two family members would be a good exchange for sex and $250,000? Some may think that she doesn’t deserve the death penalty because she is a woman, but I strongly disagree. If anyone kills, they deserve the death penalty. Others may say, well, she wasn’t in her right mind when they were killed, because she was manipulated by her two accomplices. Her accomplices, however, were just that- accomplices. They did not do anything but carry out orders. Teresa Lewis, on the other hand, was the mastermind.
ReplyDeleteThe approximate ratio of men to women that receive the death penalty is 70:1, meaning that for every one woman who kills someone and ends up on death row, there are 70 men who do the same thing and also end up on death row. This shows that the justice system of today has more men that are willing to kill and risk the consequences than women. Women are not usually violent, cold-blooded people, but they are just of capable of killing someone as any man.
a)Teresa Lewis was not mentally disabled. How I see it, mentally handicapped and morally handicapped are two different things. Lewis understood the $250,000 life insurance policy her step-son had and knew that the money would go to her husband (unless he was dead also). She even had the clarity of thought to say a prayer on the night of the murder and put the dog in the living room so that he wouldn’t interfere. Lewis planned this so far, in fact, that she tried to hide the evidence and use her daughter as an alternative payment. Does that sound like mentally retarded person to you? And regardless of her background with depression and drugs, Lewis understands right from wrong and that each wrong has a consequence; so, this “argument” that her lawyer had come up with holds no foundation. Therefore, in my opinion, Lewis deserved the needle.
ReplyDeleteb)The approximate ratio of men and women who receive the death penalty is 1:120, where the 1 represents women. This proves how unfair our justice system is. Our justice system favors women. And many can argue and say that that’s not true and that men are the more aggressive gender, therefore, get into more trouble and receive this high statistic. However, I can prove that women are capable of the same crimes and that they just get easier punishments. Like William Congreve said, “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.” In one case, Mary Winkler shot her husband, who was a preacher, in the back and after claimed that it was an accident. This made no sense due to the fact that she shot him when he was asleep. She also claimed that he abused and raped her multiple times during their marriage (which was the reason she gave the officers to why she shot her husband). Why is it that Winkler chose this time to reveal such horrendous information about her marriage? Why hadn’t she called the police during the claimed abuse or rape? Whatever the answer to these questions may be, it seemed to not matter because the jury said she was guilty for voluntary manslaughter; in other words, she is guilty of killing someone she had no intent on killing. Does this make any sense? To make things sound even more like nonsense, she was only sentenced to 210 days in jail. In my opinion, if a man were to kill his wife under the same “accusations,” he would be on death row before the excuse can even run across his lips. Even Winkler’s lawyer stated that she was able to get the sympathetic vote out of the jury because of how she said certain things. Women are seen as weak creatures; and in many other cases, like this one, women use this to their advantage so that juries and judges across the U.S. can play nice and give the easy sentences to them and say that it is “fair.” Women are not equal under the court of law and whoever says they are, must not truly understand what “equal” means.
Gender was a big part of this article, I am sure many people believed that she shouldn't be executed just because she's a women but there were also others who believed that men and women are equal so she she should be treated how a man would if he was found in this devastating situation. I believe this should have not played a role in the decision of her execution because she was a criminal whether she would have been a man or a woman. The approximate ratio of women and men given the death penalty is 68:1 making men the gender with the most executions. The Justice system probably gives more death penalties to men because they may sympathize or pity women more or because maybe men commit serious crimes more than women, but whatever the situation is what would you do if you were found in this situation would you let Teresa Lewis get away with it or give her the death penalty? This may have been a very critical decision for the jury and they might have had to put their emotions aside and focus on whats right and wrong, but maybe that is not always the case and they may believe "oh it is just a poor women" and pity her but if it were a men then they would probably said "oh that was very wrong he should be punished". This is due to how society looks at women and men and how they are portrayed; women as weak and fragile caring souls and men as ruthless and uncaring human beings. Whatever the decision of the jury was they probably looked at this case as if it were a man committing this crime to make it equal, but death penalty is another thing and they may had had other choices but they decided to go with this one.
ReplyDeleteHer gender has nothing to do with the situation. Her mental ability was rational she knew what she was doing and was capable of stopping herself at anytime. The factor of her being a woman has nothing to do with the case or the charge with the death penalty. The ratio of 68 men to every 1 woman who receives the death penalty. Which says that most killers are men and not women that does not mean more women need the death penalty less men should just stop killing. This indicates that most men commit serious crimes rather than women which means if a woman do commit a crime and she is convicted it seems unusual and they should get the minimum charge just because they are a woman.
ReplyDelete@curly karen: I agree with you standpoint because society has portrayed women as delicate and a crime is a crime whether it was done by a man or women. Also i agree with "People aren't perfect so of course no system established by people will ever be perfect" you really gave perfect examples for your standpoint. How would you have punished Teresa with imprisonment or death?
ReplyDelete@Sandra: I agree with your standpoint and also how you said "federal government always has softer side when it comes to women even though they commit the same types of crimes" and "Just because we are women doesn't necessarily mean we need to be punished less than men do" because for so long women have been trying to be seen as equal to men so this should apply to all areas even when it comes to crimes.". The justice system is pretty unfair when it comes to gender and the death penalty is a prime example of that" this is such a good example you gave and I agree 100% with this clause. What would you have told Teresa Lewis if you where her stepdaughter after she had said sorry to you?
One large factor that was included in the article was gender. I believe gender is not relevant in relation to the death penalty. It does not matter whether or not the perpetrator was female or male. Anyone could have committed a crime such as what Lewis was accused of and receive the same punishment. Throughout the years, females have been marked as unable to fend for themselves and have been viewed as far less superior to men. They have also been deemed as prostitutes. Although treatment for women is better today there are still some cases where it’s a surprise a women is involved in the first place. In this article, gender is put into the spotlight and is made into a huge deal. Should it be though? Virginia puts woman to death; rare US female execution - oh wow, how crazy is that?! Not crazy enough to rave about if it’s a woman who was sentenced. Lewis is not the first woman to commit a crime such as this, nor is she the first woman to be put into the death penalty. If it had been a man to have been accused of committing the crime, an uproar such as the one that had occurred during this case would probably not have been taken into affect.
ReplyDeleteThe ratio of women to men that receive the death penalty is about 1:100. Obviously, more men have been given the death penalty, but this doesn’t mean women do not commit the same crimes that men do. According to the Save Teresa website, there have been cases similar to Lewis’s where the defendants received the life in prison rather than the death penalty. So why did Lewis receive the death penalty? I see no difference to her case as those of Robin Radcliff’s and Catherina Voss’s. Why did those two defendants get sentenced to prison, but Lewis gets put to death? What does this really say about our justice system? It’s saying the justice system have been showing some lenience to women regarding the death penalty for the past couple of years. It’s implying women aren’t as cold-blooded and cruel as to show acts of violence It’s saying, “Oh, we put more men to death than women. We’re severely unbalanced, we should fix that!” This just goes to show our justice system is unjust and imperfect. Men have been viewed as to being as cruel as to commit violent atrocities while women have been viewed rather as peacemakers, which seems to explain why the number of men who commit serious crimes are higher up on the scale than women. But just as I stated before, gender should not be a specified factor when considering the death penalty. A crime is a crime no matter what, and it should be punished as deemed fit, no matter the sex of the accused criminal.
Well First of all, this is a very intense, and controversial topic that i dont know where i stand.
ReplyDeleteA)For one, I dont think gender, had any part of this. Even though, I do believe she has some sort of mental dissabilty. Perhaps she was not a mentally challange person, but who in the right mind would want to commint so many crimes and have numerous affairs? Yet, she was very intelligent in the way she perform everything it wasn't the best but it was something I would not come up with. As somebody already mention before, her accompliance did not mulituped her, she used them like an old pair of socks. Overall, very crazy lady but very intresting to read about.
B) The ratio is about 1:130. In my opinion, when i look at this number my justification for it is sterotypes. By making the women seem nourishing, sensable, and a caregiver. While in the other hand, man are more violent, physically strong, and consider the protectors. Yet, this women comes and proves the opposite by having a criminal mind. As a result, the judicial system could possibly be consider sexist. Men tend to be more violent and have this tendancy to solve problems with guns and blood resulting them to be the masters in crimal minds,though thier is women crimal minds.
A) I honestly feel that it should not have mattered whether Lewis was a woman or not, she had committed a crime; and a serious one at that.
ReplyDeleteJust because a woman had committed a crime does not mean that we should be lenient with them. When I think about it, women have fought for very hard to gain the right to be equal to men and to hear this is absolutely ridiculous.For example, there is a man who has committed the crime of a mass murder throughout his entire life which in total is 45; and is sentenced to death by injection.Do you think that it would be fair for the families of those who were killed for the woman to be let go due to her gender.
B)The ratio of women being given the death penalty to men is 1:108.The justice system is sexist torwards women due to the fact that there are only 11 women that have been given the death penalty as for men,which is 1189.The men who have been sentenced to death due to their serious crimes shows that men are emotionally unstable and more driven to commit serious crimes.As for women,thay are more stable in their emotional problems than men.For example, when a man becomes enraged for whatever reason it is because they are emotional unstable. Then as for the part of men being more driven to commit serious crimes goes back to men being emotionally unstable.
A) To begin, the fact that Lewis was a female should not have affected the way people observed the situation. To be very blunt, a crime is a crime and male or female if the crime is committed the consequences should be no different. This factor should not have at all played a part in her trial nor her execution. Ultimately, Lewis’ actions can only be blamed on her greed; therefore her punishment should only be base on this as well. We are always fighting for equality, fighting against being sexist, biased, and racist, but how hypocritical is it that people would judge the severity of a crime based on gender? If a man were to do as Lewis did the jury would see it as a horrific crime in which the accused showed no remorse, considering that Lewis authorized this murder she should be equally treated as would any male.
ReplyDeleteB) To continue, the ratio of women to men that are sentenced to execution is approximately 1:100. I think this proves that the justice system is corrupt. According to Office for National Statistics, more men commit crimes then women, however women have committed the same crimes; whether once or a thousand times if committed they should be therefore given the same punishment. Further more I believe this ratio says that men have been judged more harshly than women based on the fact that society does not want to except that women are no longer just house wives, barefoot and pregnant standing on the side lines, women are out in the world pursuing the same unthinkable crimes as men. The fact that women are more emotional and in my opinion more inclined to have more guilt it shows that women are even more dangerous than men in some ways.
A)Gender, gender has no say whats so ever in the actions that you do and the punishment that you recieve for those actions. Women fought for their rights to have equal rights as men so they should also have equal punishment.
ReplyDeleteB) the ratio is approximately 109 males death penalties to one female death penalty. i think that our justice system takes pity on women. mena and women both commit serious crimes, there is no doubt about that, men are more prone to commit crimes then women are. I personally think that more men commit serious crimes because most men do not think things through, women tend to do so, and they tend to have better control over themselves then men in this situation.
The article claims that a factor in determining whom deserves the death penalty is based not only on the crime committed, but on the gender as well. This appears to be a very controversial subject. Considering the ratio of men:women who receive the death penalty, which is an astounding 100:1, I would have to say it is not far off. I believe that the global community view women, though they have the same rights and obligations as men, as less responsible. The very fact that this case is prominent in the media proves my point while on a daily basis men are subject to a more drastic treatment. Why else would the ratio of men to women getting the death penalty be so vast? The fact of the matter is that women are viewed as unequals and it is wrong to do so. They helped to make the world the way it is today as much as men have and the justice system has got to realize this. Women are just as likely to commit the same atrocities that men create. Teresa Lewis's is a perfect example because it is sadistic yet conceived in the mind of a woman but committed by both sexes.
ReplyDeletea) To have mental illness is a serious thing. Whether your'e a child or an adult having mental illness is a thing to look out for. A person with mental illnes, such as Mrs. Lewis, didn't know what would be her consequences for her actions. She is a sick women that doesn't have her mind in the right place. A person with mentall illness do not deserve the death penalty. To kill a person who is already sick is a sad thing to do.
ReplyDeleteb) The ration of men to women who recieve the death penalty is one to hundred,one being women and hundred being men. Having a ratio so low for women is bad. It shows that the legal system is sexist in dealing with punishment towards women. Women and men should both have the same respect, rights, and punishment. With the death penalty so high for men, shows that they are the ones to be driven to the edge to do a crime. Men take their actions out of pulse they don't think of anything but themselves. Unlike men, it takes a lot from a women to commit a crime. Women think of thier household, their children, and what they could lose. Things happen for a reason, but there is no real reason to kill another person.
I think a gender should not chose if you receive the death penalty,if you comitt a crime suitable to be punished by the death penalty you deserve it male or female.
ReplyDeleteThe death ratio of male to female comes out to something like women only making up 2 percent of people sentenced to death.This could mean that men kill more often or it means that in a murder trial men are less likely to find mercy or pitty.I personally think women are more likely to find some compassion in the jury, although a life in prison is nothing to look forward to.This does show that our legal system is sexist.Seeing on how most trials go to the jury this can be expected because the jury is every day people.People usually seem to be a little sexist for instance a man in the jury isn't going to want to put a women to death unless it was an extreme case and for a women a man who killed someone is going to seem very dangerous and very deserving of the death penalty as apposed to a women murderer.
A) I think that it shouldn't matter if Lewis was a women, a crime is a crime and people have to pay for their actions. Lewis commited a murder and that was a serious crime. In my opinion i think women nor men deserve death, but it's not fair that men should just be sentenced to death and not women. Would anyone feel pitty for a women that killed maybe a relative or a friend?
ReplyDeleteB)The ratio of women to men that receive the death penalty is about 1:100, and it comes to show that more men are given death penalty. Men who have been sentenced to death mostly get controled by their emotions and don't think about what their doing. Women tend to be noble and kind and this women proves the opposite by having a criminal mind. Many women who commit similar crimes men commit are sentenced life in prison and not death as men oftenly are. This shows how unfair is our justice system.
A) First of all, the gender was not a factor that contributed to the punishment she recieved. The one thing that contributes to this was her mental ability. In addition her mind just heard the money she would get if the stepson and her husband died. So the easiest solution she had was to kill them both so her mind did not click with her on the consequences that would result form this. All her brain was thinking about was the money.
ReplyDeleteB) The ratio of men to women who recieve the death penalty is 100:1. By saying that for every hundred men killed one will be killed is say that the justices is pittying the women. What it is saying that men and women should be treated with the equal rights. Moreover, maybe the justice system is softer on women than men because the women is supposed to sweet and caring towards children. Finally, Tresa Lewis was a women with mental ability and her greed for money caused her to die.
Defense on mental ability:
ReplyDeleteA.) An illness that can manipulate people's minds and blocking one's conscience. Like Teresa Lewis, others have been provoked to death penalty unfairly because of a mental issue. Not to say that greed is a sickness, but Lewis was blinded by money mischief. What Lewis did was wrong, but isn't death penalty to a sick person also wrong?
B.) The ratio of men and women in death row is about 95:1. In honesty, the numbers shows that the justice system is sexist. They think that women is not as 'skilled' as men are. They think women are can not be tht murderous and so, they let women off as a mental patient or 'accidents.' Men are known to have capability of doing harsh crimes and the system do not pity them. Teresa Lewis had a disorder of greed, which led to her death, but who doesn't have an urge for money?
A) In my opinion mental disability is when a person has trouble getting his/her facts straight. Now a day’s people use the excuse of having a mental disability to get what they want thinking that that’s the best reason to get out of trouble .Mrs. Lewis in this case had no mental disability because she had the whole plot planed out. she knew exactly what she wanted which was a “$250,000 insurance policy”, how she was going to get it which was by hiring two guys to kill her husband and step son, and she knew how she was going to pay them which was by offering sex and money to both of them. The fact that she was a woman had nothing to do with why she was given such a harsh penalty.
ReplyDeleteB) The women to men ratio on the death penalty I 1:90.This ratio only proves that men are more likely to commit such crimes because they are more commonly seen as the ones doing them. I am sure that if Mrs. Lewis was a man she would have been given the same punishment. NO EXEPTIONS. Aren’t women commonly seen as caring, sweet, harmless, motherly people because they give the gift of life? Yes, they are which is hard to believe that a woman had done something so terrible.
In my oppinion, gender had nothing to do with her situation because she did something bad and needed to pay for what she did. The public only supported her because she was a woman and they thought that no woman should go through the execution. Even though people thought she had a mental dissability, she knew what she was doing and had no problem hiring people people to kill her husband and stepson.
ReplyDeleteThe ratio of woman to man is 100:1 because men are the most expected to be killed by execution while women are rarely going through execution. She went through this only because she wanted the insurance money .
Was she really mentally retarded or not? If Teresa Lewis was mentally retarded I don’t think she would have been seen as attractive to all those men that she was cheating with. In addition, any person can fool a test such as the IQ test. Anyone can act retarded and answer all those simple questions like a 12 year old. Ever since they passed that law that mentally retarded people can’t be treated the same as normal people, anyone can pass as one of them. This woman only sought money and for the most part, normal human beings only seek money throughout their lives because it is what can keep us going. So if her motive was money, she was perfectly normal, and not mentally retarded. Lastly, if Teresa Lewis was mentally retarded or really was had a dependent personality disorder it really does not matter. Everyone, no matter how messed up they are, has a conscience. There has to be a heart in every one of us.
ReplyDelete@ Christopher:
ReplyDeleteI disagree with your point of view with gender. The justice system gives more death penalities against males than females because of 'incapabilities.' You stated that men are stronger, and it's true, but women can be capable of manipulation. I agree that women fought for equal rights, which brings back to how females can have the potentials to go all out. Gender does have a say in it because women are underestimated. Do you think that women have least intentions than men to kill?
@Amy:
I do not quite follow your stand on the issue of 'accomplice manipulation,' but it does play a role. I agree that it's impossible to believe that Lewis killed her loved ones for money. I think that it's greed or just plain psychotic. In the article, it explained how Lewis is or is being manipulated, but I think that Lewis is controlling others. Like Shallenbenger and Fuller, they were shot by Lewis. She most likely used them for 'back up' and betrayed them. Was it money that made Lewis kill her two partners or was it 'just because?'
Gender should not be a factor of whether you are sent to the death penalty or not. Whether you are a women or man; we are both human. The only difference would be is the way we look. Society is use to categorizing women as weaker then men, or having more sympathy for them. But we are ALL the same; whether you are a man or woman, you are still committing a crime by killing somebody. Personality, is another difference we share. Not all women are clean, organized, sentimental, weak, and independent ; some are very strong, dependent, athletic, unorganized women. Just like not all men are tall, muscular, though, and strong; some can be be weak, sentimental, and short.
ReplyDeleteSince the Supreme Court allowed for capital statement in 1976, only 11 women out 1,200 people have be executed. This says a lot; either women are way less violent then men, or a lot of women were not punished for being- women. I would have to go with the second one. There is probably more then 11 women who have committed serious crimes, but were let go of the punishment for their gender. Or if they are punished, they most likely will not be punished as harsh as a man being punished.
A)i dont think gender was a factor. so what if she is woman. women are equally capable o thinking and commiting crimes and being the matermind behind crimes like Ms.Lewis was. a crime is a crime and no matter who committed it, they should pay the price. no matter how high that price might be, and in Ms. Lewis's case it was the death penalty. i think her greed for money and her thinking unclearly due to her drugs, caused her to think of this plan of hers. she must have been seriously mentally "unwell" to bribe those men with money and sex. she even told one of the men he could have sex with her 16 year old daughter. what person in their right mind would offer up their daughter for sex?! i think Ms. Lewis is a greedy nd selish. she didnt care what she had to do get the money. she wanted it, and did what she thought was "neccessary" to get what she wanted. thats pure selfishness to me.
ReplyDeleteB) the ratio of men to women in the death penalty is 100:1. Just think about those numbers.100 men o every one woman. the justice system is really messed up i think. i understand the whole notion of putting woman to death. No one wants to ill a woman. but whose to say that the crime of a man isn't as bad as the crime of a woman? a man kills another man, he gets the death penalty. a woman kills a man and what? She gets life in prison. but why? she committed the same crime as a man. shouldn't she get the same consequences as the man? this just proves that the justice system is all messed up. didn't woman fight for years and years to get the same rights as men? well then why should those rights be all of a sudden ignored when it comes to giving women, who deserve it, the death penalty.well i'll tell you, it shouldn't. i think ms.Lewis deserved the death penalty she recieved. She committed the crime, so she went through the consequence.thats fair and anything less than that isn't right.
A:) Gender should not play a role in the justice system. It doesn't matter what sex one is, it is about the action committed that should be judged. Protestors against the penalty Teresa was given weren't trying to save a human being, they were trying to spare a woman. They saw her as every female is viewed, fragile and weak. The death penalty "too harsh" of a judgement on this poor frail creature but what wasn't taken into consideration was why she was sentenced. She took two lives; it is only right that hers be taken as well, an eye for an eye.
ReplyDeleteB:) The ratio is 100:1 which means that for every one woman there is a hundred men that are executed. The system pitties women and that is why there are less woman executed.
A) It should not matter if Lewis is a female or male, the prosecutor, jury, or the judges
ReplyDeletewill not care if she was a guy or a girl. They think that it is all the same in there own eyes. But if you look at society they have different ideas they think that the ideal that women are fragile and therefore deserve more leeway than men. Even when in the court system men and women are all created equal, people still do not see as that way in life. When in comes to her “mental ability” people always think that just because they have a problem that it is ok that they can get away with things. But sometime those things are made up just so that the other person would look better and or feel sorry for them.
(B) The ratio of women to men executed is approximately 1:100. This says that more men get the death penalty then do women. I don’t really know why this is so, I can just assume that more people have feeling over for a women then to a men.
a) Teresa’s Lewis gender should not play any role in the trial. Both men and women of all ages are able to commit crimes and murder. Gender does not say whether you will do or did a crime. By using Teresa’s gender as an excuse, it is showing that they are sexist. This is because it is saying that since Teresa is a woman she is not smart enough to understand what she is doing.
ReplyDeleteb) The approximate ratio of men to women who receive the death penalty is 110:1. This shows that the justice system is at times sexist. Men and women alike commit crimes that would give them the death penalty. I do not think that it is just men that are committed these crimes. Therefore, there must be a fault in the justice system. The ratio says that men are doing more crimes that woman. I think this is because women get away with their crimes for the reason that they are weak women
A. Depending on the sex/gender of a person should not pay any part in the justice system.No matter what the situation is the person should be penalized. they are basically saying the "death penalty" is to hard on a woman, and it`s not fair because she took peoples life, therefore her life should be taken too. Also, people who have mental disabilities that are men still get sentenced for life.
ReplyDeleteB) the ratio of 100 to 1 is basically stating how men get sentenced to the death penalty more than the woman because the justice system feels pitty for woman
mrs. maenpaa this is my blog i changed my name to beastysl this is stacey lewis from you 4rth period
ReplyDeleteA) Gender has absolutely nothing to do with a crime commited. Whether it was a man or woman a crimes a crime, and they should recieve equal punishment for what they have done, "an eye for an eye". They tried to say Teresa Lewis was manipulated by the shooters, but that is not true she was capable of knowing what she was getting herself into and what she was trying to get out of it, money. So how was she manipulated exactly? Although execution is a heinous way for the legal system to deal with murders, it is the punishment for murder and should be carried out regardless of gender.
ReplyDeleteB) The approximate ratio of women to men who recieve the death penalty is 1:100. This tells you that the justice system is extremely flawed there is no way that out of 100 executions 1 is a women that raises a red flag. It is possible that men do commit more serious crimes than women, but half of those women convicted get only a life sentence, let alone the death penalty. Is it possible that the justice sysyem feels pity for the women more than it does men? The answer is yes, but it is wrong.
a)Teresa Lewis was a lady that has reminds me of Emily, from "A Rose for Emily", because they both killed men that they liked (or once liked). But back to the topic, i dont think that her being a female means that she doesnt deserve a punishment because she obviously had some mental problems, i mean, she knew exactly what she was doing. She was even Christian, which meant she knew that her behavior was not acceptable, yet she still commited sins that not even Jesus may pardon. On the other hand, i dont think that the death penalty was the appropiate punishment for what she did because i have heard of far worse crimes that have not been sentenced to the death penalty, so i dont agree with that. Although, I doubt that her being a woman means that she doesn't deserve the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteb)The approximate ratio for men who receive the death penalty is way more overwhelming than men who receive it. Approximately 1 out of 120 women receive the death penalty (from a total of 1200) so this says that the justice system tries to avoid this punishment as much as possible because there are millions of mildly-serious to serious crimes that happen at least per month in this country. it also says that men are obviosly the ones that more oftenly receive this punishment, so this is probably why Lewis' sentence has a little more meaning to it. I think that the reason MEN get this punishment more is because usually, men do more crimes than women, but there are some special cases that women, such as Lewis, receive it. The End
@ BRENDA R.: I agree gender should not play a role in the trial or any trial. It is compltely sexist to try an use the gender excuse if all men are created equal they should be punished equally
ReplyDelete@ CHANEL : I agree with Chanel, Teresa Lewis was the mastermind behind it. The only thing that manipulated Teresa Lewis in the end was simply greed.
I truely beliebe that gender had nothing to do with her sentence. I am thankfull that her gender did not effect her sentence because they would have gone easy on her. I also believe that the "mental disability" did effect her case. When people get the death penalty, the laywers always use that excuse to save the defendent. It realy gets annoying and gets me angry when people try to get out of the death penalty by having a mental disability. Lewis laywer obviously said that to save her. The ratio of men and women getting the death penalty is 100:1. The reason being is that women get it easyer in the law system. If it were the husband who called a hit on the wife and son, I bet you they would have not even considered life. When women are in the hands of the court, they say "she has a mental problem", or they would give her probation. The justice system favors women because they feel sorry for them. Why!!?? Some women are some of the most worst killers out there!
ReplyDeleteOne factor mentioned in the article was gender. It was considered a major issue by the people who knew her. However, gender should not have any affect on the Lewis's consequence. Whether it is a man or a woman, they should recieve the same punishment based on the extent of the crime. For example, if it was Lewis's huband who committed the crime, instead of Lewis herself, he should still recieve the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteThe approximate ratio of men to women is 1:100(ex. "...out of 1,200 people put to death...only 11 have been women.") This says that the justice system is unfair. The men who could have committed crimes less serious than this crime probably faced a consequence they did not deserve. The system may be more lenient on women because they are percieved as innocent and weak and could not pull off such a thing.
A)Teresa Lewis had stirred up many controvercial issues she made many people realize whether she lost her sanity or whether their was actual problems with her mentally. it states in her life that she's been in many relationships with many guys,affairs, and leaving her children, as if she didn't care. It makes you realize what trigger such a cruel deed ,premeditating murder killing her husband and son for exchange for adultery with two men who she hired to kill her husband and son and as well and money . Many people wonder why she did this? Their is no real answer to these types of cases the mind is a scary place for anyone who manipulates their mind and triggers this herendouse murder. One sole question Why?
ReplyDeleteB) The realization of her religiousw ways yet in her mind act like everything is fine , but in fact in her execution she was praying, rejoicing, with a bible in her hand tells that their was infact mental problem with her. The ratio between men and woman is 1:100 one being the woman her were sent to the death penalty and a hundred for the men. I believe that the reason for such a big ratio & percentage is thlat more woman either have mental issues or betrayal. Men have that issue to but all in all the is no difference besides the emotional issues .
A)
ReplyDeleteThe death penalty has no gender. Being a women had no role in her sentence to execution. Just because now a days it is rare for a women to be sentence to death penelty, it doesnt make it right to kill. Being a women helped her out with the murder of her husband and step son. For example she used sex to pay the killers to commit the crime
B)
The ratio for the death penalty for women to men is approximately 1:100. The Justice System is not working very well in the United States because the women commit murder almost as much as the men. This tells me that the system has a softer side to women when it comes to the death penalty. Women are not being charged the same as the men. The Justice System is not fair when it comes to gender and the death penelty.
A) Gender should not effect the decision of whether or not to sentence someone to the death penalty. The crime commited is still the same, no matter if the person is male or female. I think that if a man were to murder his wife and her child and he received the death penalty then, if a woman commit’s the same offense then she should receive equal punishment. Women have fought for years and years to be equal to men so this kind of situation should be no different. Therefore, gender should have played no role in Lewis’ trial what so ever. The trial and decision should be completely based on the severity of the crime and the intentions of the offender.
ReplyDeleteB) The approximate rario of women to men to be sentenced the death penalty is about 1: 109. I think this says a lot about our justice system, mainly that gender does effect the severity of the punishment between women and men. Even if more men commit serious crimes, its obvious that most the women that do commit them do not get punished as harshly. I believe this is happening because the society sympathizes with the female population. It is almost as though they believe women can not commit such vulgar crimes as those of men. When in all reality that is clearly untrue, women are capable of the same things men are and the society needs to come to that realization.
A) The accomplice manipulation couldn't be true because Teresa Lewis went up to them and purposely asked them to kill her husband and son for her. There is no way someone, who truly loves their family, would help someone else kill their family for his\her own protection from said other person. She did it of her own free will, and anyone's ultimate decision cannot be forcibly decided for them.
ReplyDeleteAccomplice manipulation is an important factor in her death penilty because she wasn't manipulaed, so most of the blame for the deaths falls on her. She could have stopped them before the killing, but she didn't. That makes her the cause and everthing that happened the effect. It makes her much more guilty then the trigermen because she came up with the idea in the first place and even payed them.
B) The approximate ratio of men to woman who receive the death penalty is 100:1. This shows that the justice system is more lenient toward woman then men. The justice system is also very brutal toward men as they are given the death penalty more then woman.
Men commit serious crimes more than woman because men are not properly disciplined at a young age and are bold enough to actually commit them. They usually are young and don't think of the consequences before they act. That is why more men get the death penalty then women.
A) Yes Teresa Lewis was very wrong in trying to gain maoney from her son and husband's death. There is obviously no exuse for killing a family member. We should still concider the fact that Lewis was not mentaly right. Any person who has had this many hardships and problems in their life obviously doesnt have a very high IQ. This lady doesnt have any moral rights and doesnt realize she did wrong untill she looks at her consequences. Yes the death penalty is very serious and severe but i think its the only thing that will make her realize what she did wrong.
ReplyDeleteB)The aproximate ratio for woman that get sentenced to the death penalty is 1 out of 100. This ratio says that usually tje justice system pitties woman more them men. Men are usually the ones that commit more crimes then woman and when a woman does something wrong she is not punished as greatly as a man. This is sexist because i think that for any crime the punishment should be the same for any person.
A) Gender played no role in this case judges and juries do not look male of female when deciding guilty or not guilty. I feel that if your a male or female you should still recieve the same type punishment for the same crime. This should not play a role in the death penalty becuase if you did the crime it does not matter what gender you are you should still do the same amount of time. There was no way she had a mental disability because she knew that her step-son had an insurance policy. She knew that the only way she could get that money was if her step-son and her husband were dead, so she took matters into her own hands and hired those men to kill them. She came up with the idea to put the dog in the bedroom. When you think about it she kind of manipulated them by giving them a portion of the money.
ReplyDeleteB)The approximate ratio of men to women who get the death penalty is 1:100. This number does not really say anything about the justice system just that men commit more crimes than women. This number says that men have more reason to do what they do because most men who result to gands and violence, did not not have a father when they were growing up. so that makes them have resentment towards people. This is happening because men have lots of built up anger and they just let it out in violence. Most women don't let their anger out that way they do other things. So that can explain why more men are in prison than women.
In this case the gender of the prisoner took a huge part,when it should not have. Each year women fight to be treated equally as men, because we have the same capability as them. Now Lewis's attorney was arguing that because she is a women that she did not have the brain to think of such a complicated plan as the one she tried to pull off! None of the people should of mentioned the criminals gender or let that change there opinion on what is the punishment for her actions.
ReplyDeleteThe men to women ratio of execution being 110:1. This shows that justice sympathies the women because there is more women out there that have the same cold heart that Lewis had when she hired the men to kill her husband and son.This ratio also shows that men do more serious crimes.Men are simply persuaded and the younger male generation follows there fathers footsteps. Another logical reason is men need that father figure and when they do not have it they turn to violence.
A)She was not manipulated, she wanted to kill her husband and son on purpose. She was manipulated maybe by the actions she did behind her families backs, such as cheat on her husband with her sisters fiancee and another man at the same time. She makes it seem like she was an insecure person that probably doesn't think things though enough; because she had a husband why would she go around sleeping with other men if she didn't have that problem. She meant to kill her husband and son, her son for the insurance life policy the son had but put his father in as well. She couldn't just kill the son, because then all the money would go to the husband, so she was fully aware of what she was doing and did think the plan out to kill them. She just didn't think about the consequence, she was overpowered with the money and power she would posses once they were dead. The men who she hired to kill her husband and son, did not manipulate her to tell them to kill her husband and son. She manipulated them by telling them that they would get a part of the money she would receive also leading that with sex which is something that she seemed to like. She manipulated the man to do her dirty job and she was trying to have "fun" during this process.
ReplyDeleteB)The approximate ratio of men to women who receive the death penalty is 7,300 to 11. Which shows that as a society we don't think that women maybe are not capable of committing and doing such preposterous crimes; ESPECIALLY is this woman is good looking, and looking at her picture, this woman did not seem appealing to the eye, so the court house probably took everything in the trial in consideration.
Men are usually known to be the ones crazed with sex and violent. This is our stereotype of a man because is has been shown again and again throughout time, that a man is more controlling, has more "power" than a woman. Now going into the new century, woman dont want to feel like they are lower; women are equal to men now which means a woman can do whatever a man can do. So if she can she can be as brutal and a man and kill like a "man" would, and do things for her own selfish reasons, such as a "man" would. That may not be the case, either way she killed for her own selfish reasons, and couldn't think strait enough because of what she was getting and going to get in the end; which are reasons that men have proposed in the past in the reasons in why they would commit the crime they have done.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI picked Gender as the one factor, and i don't think that gender should have anything to do with the fact that someone should be executed or not. Even though women are more calmed, men and women have the same mind set-up. Women are not dumber then men, they think the same. So why should the Judicial system take it easier on women. It is shown though, that the system is more biased on gender. Less women are put to death on a 1:110 ratio.
ReplyDeleteGender plays no role in the case at all in any way. She is considered a murderer and should be treated as one regardless of gender. However, it is kind of odd how she got a death penalty and the men who actually killed the father and son got sent to jail. Just because someone is a certain gender, it does not mean that they are allowed to get away with crimes, especially ones this severe. Also, there is no definite way either gender is treated in court.
ReplyDeleteThe approximate ratio of men being executed to women is 100:1, which is a huge difference. That clearly shows that women get a lot more "mercy" than men. However, men commit a lot more crimes than women, so this could greatly influence how they are treated in court. Men can easily be persuaded negatively by a lot of different things in their life than what would effect a woman.
The death penalty is no punishment to be taken lightly. It involves one doing many horrible crimes for a court system to come to this decision in the United States of America. Many factors played into this case. I believe that gender did play a role in this case. If you look at the Male to Women punishment ratio(which is 100:1) one can clearly see why this may have effected the thought process of this case. Women are thought to be pure and keep the house stable. However, in this circumstance this was the opposite. Imagine how many families she devastated including her own sister's(however, one may find this to be not tru because it showed her sister's fiancee inability to commit).
ReplyDeleteConcerning her mental abiltiy, are you serious? I do not think that should even be allowed in the court room. I have seen to many cases on television all whoch are not fictional that display that whenever was is about to be punished they say that they are mentally disabled. Seeing how she did all the stuff before hand I do not see how one did not notice that she was mentally disabled if she was. Also in the end she seemed to realise her mistakes when she explained about her mistakes about not going to church. She just happen to realise she did something wrong then? Accomplice Manipulation anyone? Of course an accomplice whos incentive was not only green hard cash, but also physical pleasure would try to persuade her to allow him to do something. She obviously sold her husband, stepson, and daughter for $250,000. The reason that she deserved a punishment worse than those killers is that it was her own family and that she was the one who HAD them killed which makes her more guiltier than the killer. She didn't have any physiological needs as defined as Abraham Maslow, thus it meant that this wasn't a fight for survival in the jungle.
Or course our justice system is not 100% accurate. We have different types of people serving on jurys. Until human decides to come together with a set of rules not with beuracracy, but with mutual understanding we can not have a perfect justice system. As for men, yes their are many that may have done crimes worse than this, but are still alive. People do not want them to be alive either. Our society spends $30,000 on each prisoner per year, far above what is spent on education. That is why people try to get rid of whomever even reaches the brink of a punishment like this. While it is sad that such an act was forced to occur, she made people believe that she was happy to go.
a) I don’t think gender played a major role in this case. To the people of the city, yes, because they confined pity towards her just because she was a woman. If Teresa Lewis happened to be a man, I don’t believe her thousands of supporters would sign a petition, but law put gender aside to serve justice. The claim that she had a mental disability, however, was outrageous. How could somebody with a mental disorder have the ability to plan out a scheme to kill her husband and his son for a $250,000 insurance policy? Her intentions were wrong, but she knew exactly what she was doing. Sick in the mind, yes; mentally ill, no.
ReplyDeleteb) The approximate ratio of men to women to receive the death penalty is 120:1. I believe that these numbers show that our justice system are more lenient towards women than men. Why would gender play a role in our justice system? The only difference I see is that men have a Y chromosome. Men who commit serious crimes seem to receive a harsher punishment than that of a woman’s. Is it so because society views men to have a tougher exterior? I believe so because although men and women are committing crimes at an equivalent degree, women are being punished at a lesser extent.
a) The one factor that I chose was accomplice manipulation. I think this is ridiculous because how is it that she claims to be "manipulated" by them when she, herself, was the one to contact them? SHE was the one to want her son and husband killed, so she went out of her way to meet the Trigger-men at Walmart to get the deed done. The Trigger-men didn't contact her trying to convince her that they should be killed. In my opinion they did not manipulate her in any way. This definitely should have played a part in her trial because the jury should have analyzed this. They should have looked at this and saw that it was NO excuse for her and she pretty much set this path for herself. Her actions determine what her punishment is.
ReplyDeleteb)I think the ratio is an average of 1:100. This says a lot about the Justice system. Obviously the Justice System seems to be sexist. Out of the billions of people in the world why is it that only 1 woman to 100 men have received the death penalty? I'm sure woman are just as capable as men to get themselves in that bad of a situation. Based on the ratio given it shows that more men have made serious crimes than woman, but my opinion is that they are just more lenient towards woman. There are many reason as to why this may be happening. One possible reason could be the media. It seems as if the media portrays guys to be more rebellious and not really worry about their consequences. By that, men are believing what they hear and see and turning into it. The media is making them who they are.
Overall, no matter what the reason is for this happening I believe Woman are not looked at the same under the Justice System. Lewis deserved a bad punishment because of the crime she committed and her being supposedly "manipulated" wasn't true. It should not have been an excuse for her.
Gender was brought up in this article. The only reason why gender was brought up and was so important, because it's was rare to have a female having to go through execution. Gender didnt really have to do with why she is being execution. It's what she did that got her in trouble, getting her husband dead. She offered money that she would be getting, just to get her husband and son dead. It's not because she is a gender but its what she did that got herself dead.
ReplyDeleteThe women to men ratio of execution would be around 1:109. The ratio shows that women get through execution rarely. The number shows that women that commits crimes gets away with it or has it easier more than men. I think it has to do what each person has done, male or female. Yea the results show men goes through execution more than women but doesn't it really depend what they have done? The women could be smart to not kill the person but just hurt them really bad just enough to avoid getting executed.
I my opion I think the mental ability was just used as a scapegoat to see if her sentence would be reduced to something less severe.People use that excuse all the time to see if their time would be reduced.The ratio for women put to death by the death penality is 1:100. To me this number does not indicate that the justic system is more tolerant toward women then men.It just means that less women commite surise crimes that would give them the death penality. My reasons for why there are more men that commit crimes like these are probly because more men are in gangs and commit these crime to try to prove their manhood. Also because the testosterone we have and for some it is hard to control.
ReplyDeletea) The factor I choose in this article is accomplice manipulation. Shallenberger used Teresa and got her to fall in love with him so she would give him the insurance money. He knew it would be easy to manipulate her and she was an easy target. Even though she was easily manipulated, she paid the consequences for her actions, but that does not mean she should get the death penalty. It was Shallenberger's idea to murder her husband and his son so he could get the insurance money. Teresa was clearly not smart, having that she also agreed to the idea and went through with it. She should have been put in jail for life, not executed. She was not the one who shot her husband and his son, it was all Shallenberger's idea. I am not saying Teresa should not get consequences towards her actions, but they did not need to execute her.
ReplyDeleteb) The approximate ratio of men to women who receive the death penalty is 100:1. It shows the justice system is not being that fair against men or women who commit crimes. It can also be that men commit more and worse crimes than women so they receive the death penalty. The death penalty should only be used against people who commit really bad crimes but they used it on Teresa and I've heard worse things that have happened but they are not sentenced to the death penalty. The death penalty should only be used for certain circumstances. If they used it for every time someone murders another, a lot of people would be executed.
Feel free to disagree with me, as I know you all will considering I went against what you guys were saying.
Does gender play a role in the death penalty? Yes. Should it? No. I believe that many people let their feelings overcome rational thought at times. Take this lady Teresa Lewis as an example. She arranged for the deaths of her husband and son so that she could get the money! Yes, she, at times, was a great lady, but the fact of the matter is, when she wasn't, she was a horrible, ruthless, mean, selfish, and murderous woman. Her gender should not exempt her from the death penalty. Oh and another point that I'd like to bring up is, why is Iran sticking it's nose in our business? Iran has enough problems of it's own and all they're doing is trying to find ways to make us look worse.
ReplyDeleteNow the ratio of men put to death versus women is 109.09:1. Like I said, gender plays a big role, but I think that it's a little too big. Are women less responsible for their actions than men? I don't think so. Now, there does seem to be a lot higher of a percentage of men that perform serious crimes and that would explain why there are so many more men put to death, but there should not be some sort of a rule in our justice system that exempts women who perform these actions from death.
As you can tell, I have changed my style of writing a little bit for this one. I usually try to sound like I am writing a persuasive essay or a book, but on this one, I was trying to come off as an columnist in a local newspaper because I really don't think that there is a better way of putting this. I don't want people to read this article and think that I like the death penalty or that I like seeing people die. These are both wrong and not even a part of our prompt. I just feel that if a woman commits those kind of crimes, she should not be protected because of her sex. Oh and I would also like to post a question to the woman holding the sign, "Life is sacred, do not kill" on the page talking about Mrs. Lewis. If life is so sacred to you, why are you protecting someone who arranged for the murders of her husband and step-son for cash? Some people just amaze me.
Her gender has nothing to do with why she was sentenced to the death penalty. Her gender was not an important factor in this because there were more important things to focus on, like her mental disability. Even though she was "mentally disabled," that doesn't excuse her for what she did. She still knew what was going on, and she agreed to go on with the plan that Shallenberger would murder her husband and his son so that they will receive the insurance money. Her mental disability Shallenberger could have also easily manipulated Teresa into this because he said she looked like an easy target, so he got her to fall in love with him so she would give him the insurance money. It doesn't make sense how Teresa got sentenced to the death penalty while Shallenberger got sentenced to life. I understand Teresa had received consequences for her actions, but Shallenberger was the one who reallt took action and murdered her husband and his son. He should have been the one to receive the death penalty, even if it could have been her idea, or his.
ReplyDeleteThe ratio of men to women who receive the death penalty is about 100:1. Is gender a really huge factor of what the justice system decides who gets the death penalty or not? In my opinion, it is not by gender, but by what crime you have committed. The ratio shows men commit more crimes than women.
I think that gender should have nothing to do with the decision of someone getting the death penalty. If u committed a horrible crime then you deserve to get the death penalty. I do not think that gender should have played a part in the Lewis' trial. The approximate ratio of men to women that receive the death penalty if 109:1. This number suggest that the justice system feels pity for women and is a lot tougher on men. This evidence is saying that if a man and women were to commit the same crime the women would most likely given a lighter sentence. I believe this is happening because women do not get in as much trouble as men do.
ReplyDeleteA) Gender should have played a part in Lewis’s trial and ultimate execution for she committed a crime just as the males who did the action that Lewis did. The fact that both genders are treated equally when it come to the death penalty emphasize that people in the U.S are really being treated equally in a non-sexism or non-favoritism way. Just as males would have been put to death for such circumstance, females share the same consequence and are not giving special privileges for being female.
ReplyDeleteB) The approximate ratio of men to woman who receive the death penalty is 1:120. One woman out of every 120 men receive the death penalty.
The justice system has no affect on the situation for it is the women who rarely do the same mistakes that man do in extreme crimes.
What this says about the number of men who commit serious crimes versus woman is that women have different mind sets than men. This is happening because stereotypically, woman are not seen as the rebellious as are males. Females are viewed as the emotional ones, but not the ones that get emotional enough to kill someone. Woman tend to have less anger issues than man, thus, there is a higher amount of males committing serious crimes than females.
A)Gender does play a crucial factor in the article because a women is often given a lesser punishment than a man. If it had been a man that committed the same crime there is a high chance that there would have been less people protesting about the execution. If you notice that on the first link that was given the title clearly states " Va. women put to death, rare female execution". They are not generally saying that the case was weird in a sense but that it was rare for a women to be executed. This factor should not play a big issue on the trial because under the constitution it states that "all men are created equal" and back in the days women fought for these qual rights(like the right to vote and same pay).So, if a women can received the benefits from this shouldn't they also received its drawbacks.
ReplyDeleteB)The ratio of men to women who received the death penalty is 100:1, this tells us that our justice system goes a little easier on a women's punishment vers/s a man's punishment. Let us say that a women-a*d a man commit the same crime and both violated the same concept. There is a greater possibility that the women would received a lesser punishment than a man,and the reason is simple women are seen as weak and in need of protection. This is a factor why people protested against Teresa's trial because the saw her in a state of vulnerability. They were willing to use anything to her defense,even declaring her mentally unstable.
Gender Should not have anything to do with the way people are punished for the bad things they do. I think this ocurred because women killing theyre husband is not a case that happens very often and is a serious crime. Although Ratio's show men are more likely to commit crime than women, what matters more is the crime commited.
ReplyDeleteA)I think gender should have not have roll in the decision that was tooken.Woman have the same capability as men do.She did what she did and for that matter she should suffer the concequences.Gender should not play a roll when your dealing with a casuality like this one.
ReplyDeleteB)The ratio is 100 to 1.So what does this say about the justice system? Does this make us implie that woman are treated more lenient? Men are usally the one who commite crimes this epic.If a woman does commite a crime this big i dont think her gender should be considerded when coming to a conclusion for her actions.
a) One of the factors in this article was that Teresa Lewis had a mental disability. The outcome of her sentence into jail may not of changed do to action, but the death penalty should not have been put into affect. Although the disability was not mentioned, it may have been an important reason on her actions. The article also states that Lewis was manipulated. The whole story or truth of what really happened was not explained but depending on the disability, manipulation from one of the trigger men may have taken place.
ReplyDeleteb)The ratio of women to men that receive the death penalty is approximately 1:100. This shows how flawed the justice system is in the sense that women aren't considered as bad as men. It seems as if women can commit the same crime as a man, but that women will be the lucky one to slide past the death penalty until 100 men commit that same crime and die and 100 women will commit that same crime and 1 will die. It seems wrong and unjust!
Diana:I agree with you,the protesters were noticing her gender not the crime she committed. they did just see a fragile women not one that could create such a harsh plan to kill her husband.
ReplyDeleteAlonzo:I also believe that if a man and a women committed the same crime the women's sentence would be lighter. People see us as fragile and incapable of doing such a horrible thing.
To Curly Karen:
ReplyDeleteI agree with all your arguments. Women are sympathized with more and do get the easier punishments when it comes to the law. However, can you possibly believe that she didn't deserve the death penalty? The only other option was life in prison without the chance of parole. Is that any better than death?
To Alonso Corrujedo:
You stated that she was mentally retarded. If she were really mentally ill and did not understand what was going on, she wouldn't have been able to plan so far into the murder. For example, her intelligence was stable enough to understand life insurance policies and high finance. She was also able to understand that the men she was dealing with would do what she asks if she bribed them with sex and money. And to put things over the top, she was also smart enough to comprehend the extremity of the act and pray on the night of the murder. These actions do not add up to a mentally retarded person. They do, however, say that the person has no morals; which is something I agree with you on. Considering all of this, do you believe Lewis was the only person who deserved the death penalty? Or should the same punishment be dealt out to her accomplices also?
A) Even though gender played a role in this case, I feel that it shouldnt matter whether you are male or female. We should all receive the same treatment. I dont believe that she had anymental disabilities because she was well aware of things that were important like the insurance policy.
ReplyDeleteB) The ratio of men to women who get the death penalty is 1:100. To me this shows that our society is unfair and unequal. For this reason many people result to violence and also anger, which usually results to men letting it out in negative ways whereas women usually tend to approach anger differently.
To Luke: I completely agree with him,a person's sex should not alter the final diecision on whether or not they are severly punished.While Lewis had a mental illness,that illness did not alter her decision in killing her husband; let alone hire killers to do the job.Secondly,if Lewis had a mental illness i dont think that it would affect her ability to think and her actions; which said that she had sex many times with many different men.Lastly,the only time that she was religious and opened the bible was at church which somewhat showed how religious she really was.
ReplyDeleteTo Chanel: You are right.Everyone says that this is the modern age,where women do everything just as well as men; doesnt mean they will be good things.Just like there are professional male sport players,there are professional female sports players.In the news, you do not only see male crime commiters, but also female crime commiters who may be worse.Finally,with this being the twenty first century it will soon be the other way around, with women being stereotyped as strong masculine types and males as femenine and in-touch with their emotions who have to proove to everyone that a man can do everything that a woman can do.
To Bhavin, I disagree with you. A person with mental illness is not in thier right mind. The way they think, act, and react to stuff is way different froma healthy person.This women could have been easliy munipulated to agree with her husband's and son's killing. Also, Mrs. Lewis did not kill her husband she was only a manipulation accomplice. What punshiment should the guys, who actually killed Mrs. Lewis' family get?
ReplyDeleteTo Eric, I fully agree with you. Men and women are created equally. It is true women have fought all their lives to be treated equally. The fact that Lewis' supporters touched that subject was dumb and unreasonable. Crime is a crime no matter who does it, whether it be a man or a woman, it is still a crime. What is the diffrence between the crime Lewis did versus the crime of her two complices?
To Diana: I agree with you that gender has no reasoing for sentencing her to the death penalty. That is so true on what you sayed that if she took two live they should take hers. In other words an eye for an eye. So why didn't the acomplice get the same punishmen if they killed them not Lewis?
ReplyDeleteTo Chanel: I agree with you the greed and selfish had a lot of to do with her action she took to get the money. Also, by her offering her step daughter up for sex is hitting rock bottom. Her despersation also had to do with the lack of drug in her system. Shouldn't the people that killed the father and stepson get the death pentally lie Mrs.Lewis?
(Posting for Andrew Hawkins)
ReplyDeleteA) Manipulation itself has a negative connotation indicating corrupt influence. Accomplice also has a bad reputation as it relates to an assistant of a crime. Those two works together create a havoc for debatable interpretations. In general, one who is easily manipulated can be called feeble minded. Without a doubt, those weak minded individuals would need some assistance in planning out such a heinous crime as Teresa Lewis did. The crime committed, by far, deserved appropriate justice, however, does it call for such extreme measures as the death penalty? An accomplice to a murder deserves just as much, if not more punishment for a crime committed, than the actual mastermind. Yet, with the manipulation factor thrown into the scenario, the accomplice now becomes the mastermind and the supposed mastermind is now reduced to an accessory. Therefore, should it be considered when contemplating capital punishment? Definitely yes! If the claim is true, and Teresa Lewis was persuaded to assist in planning the crime, then she should have not been given as much blame as she had. Lewis' accomplice, who actually followed through with the crime, got a lighter prison sentence than the supposed 'mastermind' who was sentenced to death for simply constructing such a plan. The key word, manipulation, gives Lewis very limited leeway as to being a victim herself, still not enough to rid her of the consequences though. By all means, punishment should have at the equal upon both parties.
B) Throughout history, men have always been perceived as the aggressors, the aggravators, the assailants. If two members of the opposite sex were to commit the same crime under the very similar circumstances, the persecution would more than likely favor the woman's side. The approximate ratio of men to women how are sentenced to death is 100:1. The variation in that factor is significant in regards to our justice system. In a great majority of cases, women are regarded as fragile individuals and are rarely harshly punished for their actions. As obvious, the numbers reflect on what is expected from both sexes. It would not be surprising for a woman to take ballet classes as a girl, it is imagined that they would participate in some feminine activity rather than builing houses at a young age. For that same reason, more men are sentenced to death than women; it's what is expected. Men being historically labeled as 'superior' to women has given them the capabilities to act, in various ways, more violently than women, subsequently, their numbers would appear higher.
to eric=)i agree with you eric because i think its true that guys usally are the ones who commite the crimes because they dont have emotions like women do
ReplyDelete4rm=marlyn
to brenda m= i have i question if you are saying that gender should have played an important role in the trail of mrs.lewis or it shouldnt?
ReplyDeleteTo Sahara: I agree with you in a) and b). a)People should not be judged in their sex. b)its true that we are not treated equal. Also, good sentences, but could use more detail.
ReplyDeleteTo Andrew Hawkins: Both a) and b) are good, but a) has good diction. Both a) and b) give detail on their subject.
Raymond: I agree with your standpoint. It is true that society today still holds on to the idea that women are fragile and seem to have a bit more freedom than men when it comes to crimes such as this. When you turn on the television and watch convicted criminals on the news, you’ll notice that a majority of them are men, so I definitely agree when you say that men are usually the ones who are found to be at fault. But just like you said, it doesn’t mean women aren’t a part of any criminal activity as well. Good job on your argument! How would you be able to fix our justice system (that is, if you think that there are some kinks and errors to their ways of judgment)?
ReplyDeleteJosh: I agree with your standpoint as well. Although I believe women are being treated a lot better nowadays, I still think us women are still seen as unequal to some parts in society. If we weren’t, then why would the public make such a huge deal on a woman committing a crime not unheard of? With that being said, I also agree when you say men are subjected to more drastic treatment than women. This is proven due to the outrageous ratio between the men and women receiving the death penalty. The justice system has definitely got to realize women are also capable of committing atrocities the likes of men commit. Good job with your explanations Joshybear! If you were part of the media, would you publicize Teresa Lewis’s execution the way it was in the article?
@marlyn: Oh snap, you caught that. I meant to say that gender should not play an important role because one should be given the same justified treatment regardless of their gender.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@ Raymond: I agree with your standpoint. Women should be treated just the same as males when it comes to deciding the death penalty. I like your argument stating that even though men dispute, women can be violent. I don't know about having her gender be used against her, but i do agree with you that it should not benefit her.
ReplyDeleteYou do come on a little strong about this woman, however. Are you supporting your standpoint on personal experience or just logic?
@ nickey93: I disagree with your standpoint. Her "mental diasability" could have caused her to not know what was going on. Her mind could have conviced her that what she was doing was the right thing to do. I figure Shallenberger was sentenced to life for going along with the plan, but Teresa was executed for devising the plan.
Do you think you would have had more position if it were a male instead of a female?
to ALejandra =) I agree with you comment. You state clearly that they might be either less violent or more pittied. In addition, i liked how you stated that we all have different personalities. I loved the way you stated the differences in the views that they punish women. Question: WHy do you believe that she got a death penalty when other women in similar cases don't?
ReplyDeleteto Jeremiah:) I agree with the statement you made about the disability thing as a scapegoat. I believe that too. I dont agree though, on the point that you made about the justice system not having pitty. For instance, what would you say about a woman with the same case but gets a different punishment? what made Lewis different?
To damien: I agree with you in what you said in there should not be a special treatment when it comes towards women on trial.
ReplyDeleteTo Alonzo: I also agree with your comment because women do get a lighter jail sentence, but when it comes to men tha judge give them the maximum.
@ Bee
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. No one should be punished diffrently for their gender. It is true that men are more likely to commit a crime than a women.
@ Bhavin
Your right the death penalty is no punishment to be takken lightly. Yes the gender did play a role because the ratio from male to women is 100:1
To Bhavin: I agree with you that there is no posibilty that she was mentally disabled. She willingly asked the gunman to kill her family and rewards one of them by setting him up with her daughter, who didn't verbally comply, to have intercourse. I also agree with you that she had to have planned this beforehand and thought it through. You have to think about moving your arm before you do it, and she couldn't have done all that by impulse. Consider this, if she is the one who gave them the guns than how could she have been menipulated with that power behind her?
ReplyDeleteTo Maria: I agree with you that gender, mental disability, and accomplice manipulation sould not have played a major part in the trial because they are either irrelavent or not true. Gender shouldn't matter because it's not who or what you are its what you do that counts. That is why courts require evidence to prove what you did or didn't do because it is dangerous to just believe what everyone says. Like if someone told you that there were millions of dolars waiting for you off a cliff to break your fall, but would you jump? No, of course. Consider this, When you are backed into a corner, or court case and your life is on the line isn't it just human nature to try anything to survive, as in claming mential disability or accomplice manipultion? I am asking this because you were wondering why people claimed these things.
@Bhavin: I agree with your statement as well, the crime she committed or "caused" shouldn't have been tooken lightly in any ways. But I disagree with you when you said gender played a role, a murderer is a murderer regardless of gender.
ReplyDelete@Alex: I disagree with you statement, because I think gender played no role in her punishment.
To Julie: I agree with what you have to say because a person who has a mental disorder couldn't have possible been able to come up with a plan so sinister. Clearly, her mind was on the money the whole time which makes is easier to understand that she knew what kind of trouble she was getting into from that moment, but do you think the death penalty was honestly the right way to go?
ReplyDeleteTo Luke: I also agree with what you have to say because men are more likely to be sentenced the death penalty over women. Gender should not serve an importance in our justice system, but it does so anyway. Women are treated more lenient in the court of justice and that isn't fair, but do you think that life in prison and the death penalty are far different?
@ raymond: I completely agree with you, Raymond. Wow! This is the first time we agree on something. I agree with you in how today's society does not rely on the gender of the criminal to sentence them to death.
ReplyDelete@Guadalupe : I agree with you. But it would be better if you had elaborated a little bit more to make your argument stronger.
@ Alex: Alex, you are my friend and all but I completely disagree with you. The ratio between male and female crimes that ended in execution does not imply that women are favored in society. Women are just less prone to having the idea of doing something so ultimately stupid that would cost them their lives. Because I know you so well you will probably pull out the story A Rose for Emily to fight back with. You will say that the government (colonel sartoris) went easy on Emily's taxes because she was a women. This is totally different so don't pull it out.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTo:Raymond
ReplyDeleteAgree what you about gender not playing a part in this, like you said "Gender had no role in this, woman fall at the mercy of the court just as men do when it come to sentences such as the death penalty." I believe she was in this position because of how harsh her crime was. They based it off of facts; but in the other hand as i explained that maybe not gender but "her physical appearance" is what I think played a bigger role, because we see over and over again that the pretty girl doesn't get "as" punished as the ugly girl.
To Damian: I agree with what you said for B, "Men are usually the one who committed crimes this epic.If a woman does committed a crime this big i don't think her gender should be considered when coming to a conclusion for her actions." because it is true, people usually see men as the ones with a sort of mastermind-and the ones who are capable of doing such a thing. Her actions were treated fairly. She got the punishment that everyone who does this "would/should"get.
To Sahara: I agree with your standpoint. It really shouldn't matter whether we are male or female. We're only human and we deserve the same treatment as one another. Our own actions determine the things that happen, not our gender. Do you ever believe that, at times, men have it easier than women do?
ReplyDeleteTo Bhavin: I also agree with your standpoint. The death penalty is definitely nothing to be taken lightly. It isn't something we can take back if we change our mind. Once someone is gone they're gone for good. It's not easy to just take someones life away with the flip of a switch. You mention being "mentally ill" seems to be the excuse for many, but did you ever think for one case it was true?
To Abby=]
ReplyDeleteI did not think of it the way you did, but know I agree with you. We really do not know if she was mentally retarded or was faking it. She could have lied to save herself from going to jail. They said that she had the mind of twelve or thirteen year old, but at that age you know that, murder is a wrong thing to do. What could be done to know what her IQ really is?
To Casandra
I agree with you. Society has different standards for men and women. In society’s eyes, women do not do big crimes on their own; they need a “smart” man to tell them what to do. She wanted him dead to get the money, and would have gotten someone else to kill him if the men she hired did not. I think that she could have lied about her mental ability too. What would you have done if you were the judge?
To Chanel: Very well written argumentitative point, they sounds very well thought off, even though for me personaly the story had me thinking all over the place, but your points of view express show a deep understanding of the artice. I also, enjoyed reading about the men to women ratio and yes it is very corrupted because even a women can create a crime.
ReplyDeleteTo Aimy: I dont necessarily agree with that, because of the simple fact that she had a really good understainding of what she was doing. In any case I think she was the one manipulating them.
@Eric: I agree with you on the part where you said that gender should not have mattered in the case but I do not agree with the part where you said that the justice system is sexist towards women. I do not think that that is what the system is doing; it is relying on the stereotype that women are always morally right. that is why the justice system is being less harsh on women. I also don't agree with what you said about men being emotionally unstable while women aren't. I think that it doesn't matter if you are a man or a women, anyone could emotionally stable or unstable. Anything could cause anyone to commit a crime. Are you saying that men don't have a strong enough willpower to control their emotions?
ReplyDelete@Destanie: I agree with what you are saying especially the part where you said about women being more dangerous than men in some ways. I say this because the way that people percieve women to be "good", many of them could commit a crime and cover it up and act like nothing ever happened. Its kind of like a women putting on cover up to hide the zit on their face. She knows that it there but would use some kind of disguise to hide it. Do you think that the justice system would ever change and start to look for a punishment based on the crime not a person's gender?
To Sandy 5118: I completely agree with you, when you say that she manipulated her accomplices not the other way around. I like how you refer back to the article and state how she bribed them with sex and money. Like you said she was selfish not only because she wanted to steal her stepson's money but because she sold her daughter for sex in return for her own personal gain. Do you believe that her accomplices should have received a less harsher punishment because they were manipulated? Or a harsher punishment because the were dumb enough to fall in her trap?
ReplyDeleteTo marlyn: I also agree with you,she couldn't have been mentally disabled because she had a whole plan on how to get what she wanted. It's true that many "victims" use mental disability to get a less harsher punishment. If she was not fully aware of her actions, she wouldn't have made her actions so planned out. What characteristics would you qualify as mentally disabled?
Alex Gonzales: I agree with your statement. You got your point acrros, but you did not have enough evidence. You also repeated somethings over, but in different words. Why do you think they take it easier on women?
ReplyDeleteDamian: i also agree with you statement. along with alex you did not list enough evidence, it was really brief.Why do women differ from men in this case?
Curly Karen: I agree with you when you say the article title in itself “Virginia puts woman to death; rare US female execution” refers to the gender of the criminal. The gender of a person shouldn't matter if they are committing a crime. The justice system should not treat women more differently than men. The article title, "rare US female execution" shows how surprising it may be to see a female get a death penalty, and not a man. If Teresa Lewis was not a female and was still sentenced to execution, would it have made the article headline?
ReplyDeleteQuadree: I agree with your statement. There are two sides to every story. It was possible Teresa was manipulated and was mentally disabled. There were two articles, and the article, "Va. puts woman to death; rare US female execution" did not include every detail there was. There was a second article, "Save Teresa Lewis," which included more information, including one of the accomplice's own personal quotes. Did you think it was fair for Teresa to get executed or should they have just sentenced her to life in prison?
(Posting for Andrew Hawkins)
ReplyDeleteTo: Destanie
Your blog makes complete sense. You’re right! We have been fighting for equality for ages, and to revert back to our old customs in the blink of an eye is foolish. Male or female, young or old, a crime is a crime and these demographics should not be taken into consideration to such extent. The traditional vision of a beloved housewife needs to be destroyed because hypothetically speaking, it does not really exist. Although you went into great detail about your opinion, you did not really state your stance on her sentence. Do you believe she deserved the punishment she was given?
To: Jenny
If claims do prove true, and Lewis really did have a mental illness, then your right, it would be morally wrong to sentence a mentally-ill person to death for a crime they may not have been aware they committed. You stated that a mental illness can manipulate the mind and I could not agree more. What just is sentencing someone to death if they’re not mentally stable to wither in the wraths of their punishment? In closing, you included that Teresa Lewis had a “disorder of greed,” should that factor have lightened her sentence?
@ Julie: Good argument about Lewis not being mentally disabled! I completely agree with you there. She did know about the life insurance policy and also she wouldn't get it as long as her husband was till alive. The way how she knew right from wrong, most likely was from being raised in a religious household. It was a very persuasive argument. Good job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:)
ReplyDelete@ Bhavin: you also wrote some good points but, i thought that it dragged on too much. DI love the way you stuck to the points you chose and biult upon them, but next time, try to do it with less words: it doesn't need to be an essay! Otherwise, you did really well.
In this article it seems that gender does not play a huge role for several reasons. One of those reasons is, if they would of take this in consideration they would not executed Teresa Lewis. However it seems that they did considered her mental ability to take the decison they took. I do believe that she had a mental disability, but there must of been more things that contributed on her mentall image to com,mite the actions she did. I believe that this was ok to take in consideration on her execution, but I do not feel positive about this for several reasons.
ReplyDeleteB.According to www.about.com in 2000 there were 85 prisoners from each diffrent state around the country.83 men were executed and only 2 women's were this says a lot about how the criminal system works.
-In a research that I found it said that 22.4% of men commited a crime versues a women.In the opposite case womens have a lower percentage of commiting any type of crime over men.
(I believe that this percentages makes us think even deaply about Teresa's case, and makes us wonder why if men are more exposed to commite crime more than women's; Why this women is being executed.
This says a lot about the justice system because it seems that they have more considerations with women whe nthey commite any type of crime than men. But with Teresa this was not a very thinkable question on this system because they did take their decision towards this.
To Curly Karen: I do agree with you Karen becaue women's are thought of something completly opposite from what Teresa did.It is very true what you stated that when any person see's that any women has commited a crime hey see this as a very not normal thing, and this is because of how people picture a women.Do you believe that the justie system handle this case correctly?
ReplyDeleteTo Angie: I agree with you Angie, I still do not know in what position I stand. I believe that many poeple feel this way beause of how sterotype are drawn on our brain and how we do take this in action towards many of these. Do you think it was a good decision for Tersea to be executed?