Nichols confessed to the killings but claimed he was legally insane and gripped by a delusional compulsion that he was a slave rebelling against authority. Jurors rejected defense arguments that he was legally insane or mentally ill at the time.
Nichols was accused of overpowering Fulton County sheriff's deputy Cynthia Hall on March 11, 2005, as he was being led into a courtroom where he was facing a second trial on rape charges.
Officials say he took Hall's gun from a lockbox and fatally shot three people at the courthouse: Fulton County Superior Court Judge Rowland Barnes, court reporter Julie Ann Brandau and Fulton County sheriff's Sgt. Hoyt Teasley, who attempted to apprehend him outside the building.
Nichols also was convicted of killing David Wilhelm, a federal customs agent, hours later at Wilhelm's home in the Buckhead section of Atlanta.
It certainly sounds like a lame attempt at claiming mental incapacity. And there's no denying that a killing spree like this which was essentially an attempted escape from the second rape charge he was facing, makes him a very bad boy. The defense attorney must have felt this was their best shot, as opposed to the abusive childhood pitch, for example. The jury didn't agree, nor are they likely to in the penalty phase, I would say.
It's a case like this that tests one's resolve concerning abolition of the death penalty. I feel capital punishment is wrong because we should maintain consistency between what we preach and what we do, as a State. If it's wrong to kill, it's wrong for Brian Nichols as well as for the State of Georgia.
One comment by the lawyers really caught my attention because it's exactly the way I often feel on this blog.
They said he has been diagnosed with a disorder that involves delusions of persecution, as well as grandiose thinking.
I strenuously appeal to the readers of this blog for an acquittal based upon the above statement.
What say ye?
"If it's wrong to kill, it's wrong for Brian Nichols as well as for the State of Georgia."
ReplyDeleteImplying that if it's OK to put Brian Nichols away in Prison for killing, then Police officers who kill in the line of duty should also be locked up.
Should soldiers returning from the Middle-East battlegrounds be locked up too, or should we just exile those killers?
I'm being a tad theatrical to point out a missed nuance in law and language.
Culturally we use the word "Killer" only in a negative sense, but the umbrella for which that word defines includes some very good things.
A "Killer" is simply "one who kills", now of course this includes Murderers (An unlawful killer) The various titles of killers through accident or negligence. But it also includes many people who are called by society and the law to kill, like Police, Executioners, Soldiers, and of course people who use deadly force to defend life.
Also we can get VERY far down into splitting definitions, we could say Veterinarians, Animal researchers, game wardens, hunters,slaughterhouse workers and other people who lawfully kill animals are also killers.
And we can always discuss what exactly the art of Abortion Doctors accomplishes....but we won't argue that they are operating well within the law, so whatever they do "Murder" is not one of them.
So, Mike, this leads me to a very big question to ask you. you say:
"I feel capital punishment is wrong because we should maintain consistency between what we preach and what we do, as a State. If it's wrong to kill, it's wrong for Brian Nichols as well as for the State of Georgia."
Which is very black-and-white. This means you either support punishment for lawful killing as well as unlawful murder and manslaughter. Is that true, or do you need to revise your statement?
Weer'd I think you know very well I don't mean soldiers or cops legitimately killing in the line of duty, and much less veterinarians.
ReplyDeleteI'm talking about murder which is what I consider capital punishment to be. It's pre-meditated, cold-blooded murder usually done for expedience or vengeance. To me that's a problem.
"It's pre-meditated, cold-blooded murder usually done for expedience or vengeance. "
ReplyDeleteWow, TOTALLY Wrong.
First up, it is not "pre-meditated" in any sense. It is called for in the law, it is perscribed by a court, and it is carried out by peace officers in exact accordance to the law. You have to stretch the legal term "pre-meditated" pretty far to get to that point.
Also the above is to be done both impartially and within the governance of the law that forbids cruel and unusual punishment. A death sentence is hardly "Cold Blooded"
And finally it is a sentence, not "Vengence" or "Experdiation". To call it anything else is simply untrue. Others may call it what they wish, but calling a Dog a "Cat" in no way changes the reality of the situation.
I could be wrong, but from what I see it almost appears that your vision of "Problem" is created to support your feelings....not the other way around.
a death penalty case goes through how many years of deliberate proceedings in how many courts, and that doesn't count as premeditation?!
ReplyDeleteof course it does. the death penalty is a very carefully planned, very deliberate killing; it's premeditated if anything is. it's also a needless killing. the two together make it murder, in Mike's eyes and mine too.
See, now there's a logical argument, that while I can't agree with, I can certainly respect.
ReplyDeleteI could argue "Need" of it, but it would be exceedingly difficult as I don't see what we call here actual capital punishment....I see the death penalty in America as a political fiasco, not any sort of true penal system that could be analized for cost/benifit.
As for "Pre-Meditation" do you care about that only in the juxtoposition with "needless" or would you consider, say a Military strike on the same grounds? I belive I already know your answer
military strikes usually are, and certainly should be, premeditated. but no, that alone isn't enough to make them morally wrong; so long as there's sufficient justification of a need to perform them, i'd say they're acceptable.
ReplyDeletewar, in general, gets into very hairy moral territory though, and the arguments used for and against it start tying my brain into painful knots. i'm ethically against warfare in most situations, but i'm prepared to accept there are some things worse than going to war, and i'm not willing to disarm any entire nations for the sake of pacifism.
I wrote about Nichols here, in my piece on Rick Warren.
ReplyDeleteI hope they spare his life, but I wouldn't count on it.
a slave rebelling against authority?
ReplyDeletewell, thats certainly a new one one ME....
Daisy, I remember that post but didn't make the connection with Brian Nichols. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteNomen, Thanks for clarifying my position so well that you earned the respect of Weer'd. Good job explaining pre-meditated.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteLet's talk about this statement, I've been thinking about it a lot lately.
They said he has been diagnosed with a disorder that involves delusions of persecution, as well as grandiose thinking.
I strenuously appeal to the readers of this blog for an acquittal based upon the above statement.
As with many things this is in my opinion a bogus defense. I'll show that by turning reversing the race.
If it was a White defendant that had murdered blacks would it be acceptable to argue that he thought they were escaping slaves, therefore it was acceptable to kill them to prevent his property from escaping?
It doesn't make sense to accept a delusional white person killing nor does it make sense to accept a delusional black person killing.
Sorry, Bob. I tried to make a joke on the end there, which in rereading I see was pretty lame.
ReplyDeleteI wanted to shift from talking about the case of Brian Nichols to the case of myself on this blog and the many accusations I've faced. I was appealing to you commenters for an acquittal based on a "disorder that involves delusions of persecution, as well as grandiose thinking."
That's cool Mike, I just found the mental illness defense ridiculous in this case. Transposing it from slave to slave owner showed how bad it was.
ReplyDeleteGood post and discussion.