Convicted killer Cleveland Clark was sentenced to death Thursday, hours after he unleashed a tirade at the Fulton County Courthouse.
Earlier in the day, Clark, 52, slammed the defense table and screamed obscenities as prosecutor Kellie Hill made her closing arguments. Last week, the same jury convicted Clark of killing Sparkle Rai for $10,000 in a murder-for-hire scheme financed by Rai's father-in-law.
The ajc site has some more details.
Rai’s father-in-law, Chiman Rai, a native of India, wanted Rai dead because he opposed his son marrying an African-American woman. Sparkle, then 22, and Rajeeve “Ricky” Rai had been married a month when she was murdered.
Clark was the last of those implicated in Rai’s death.
Chiman Rai, 68, was sentenced in 2008 to life in prison without the possibility of parole for hiring Clark to kill Sparkle Rai.
What's your opinion? The news report explains that two other men — the links between Chiman Rai and Clark — each were sentenced to 10 months’ probation because they helped prosecutors bring cases against the father-in-law and Clark. Does the fact that these guys benefited from their testimony detract from its value? Certainly that's true in some cases, but I would think these go-betweens must have had information about the crime that made for solid convictions.
I feel that a cold-blooded hitman who commits murder for money is worse than other murderers. The others usually have some mitigating circumstances, but the hit man, I'm afraid he's on the top of the list for punishment. My only problem is the maximum punishment should be life in prison without the possibility of parole. We should start there and work down.
What do you think? If Clark had remained calm and acted remorseful, do you think the outcome would have been different for him? Or do you think his fate was sealed when the father-in-law who hired him was sentenced to life without parole?
Please leave a comment.