Hypothetical: Would You Spare A Serial Killer?

[Shendude]

Say in the near future, we have a guy who, over a period of about 8 years, has kidnapped, tortured, mutilated and then murdered about 46 children between the ages of 4 and 16. There is no chance he's innocent, he freely admits to having done it, and has no remorse. He's being tried in one of the states that still has the death penalty.

Sounds open and shut, right? But there's a complication. This man is quite possibly the greatest genius of the modern era, a true polymath. His work has added more to the body of scientific knowledge than every other scientist of the past 200 years combined. His inventions have and will revolutionize the world. His medical work has saved millions of lives, and will save millions more. He has created works of art that equal if not surpass the greatest artists of the Renaissance, and works of music that equal or surpass the greatest Classical composers. He is only 21 years old.

Now, his lawyers make the argument that, for all the heinousness(sp?) of his crimes, his brilliance is too valuable to be lost.

What do you think should be done with him.

Before anyone comments, I know such a thing is probably impossible, but try to take it seriously anyways.

 

[Stella_Omega]

loading the dice are you? Must your character be EVERYTHING good? There aren't any polymaths of the sort you posit, you know. No one that makes great art, great medicine, great mathematical discoveries. good, yes, greater than anyone in 200 years- no. knock him back some, make him more realistic, and then we can start talking about it!

basically what you are asking is- if someone is valuable to society in one way and detrimental in another way- which way should our judgement go?

We have actually had some parallel issues in the past. The nazi scientists and doctors made enormous headway into many medical questions, by callously using Jewish prisoners as test subjects. They learned much about treatments for hypothermia, starvation, pain. I leave it to your imagination as to how they learned these things.

Should we use that knowledge, or should we ignore it because of the way it was gathered?

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Is this rechearch for a story, or something?

Well, I'm viscerally against the death penalty under any circunstances, so it would make no difference if he were an illiterate bushwhacker.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Without entering a debate on capital punishmnet.

In my opinion, you have to execute him. Equal justice before the law, demands you treat him no differently than you would any other seial killer. His accomplishments are not germane to the crimes commited.

Certainly, they do not constitute mitigating circumstace to his crimes and in the way you have cast it, you have to execute him.

To do anything else would not be just.

 

[JokerWild]

Well i wouldn't kill him......but i'd sure as hell make him suffer! Slice off his manhood, cut off all of his toes, cut off one of his arms, and on his other arm remove his middle finger, cut off his right ear, and pop out one of his eyeballs....and remove all of his teeth.

He's not dead and not healthy...but he can still help out the nation or whatever.....oh yea and rip out his hair so it doesn't grow back.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Certainly, they do not constitute mitigating circumstace to his crimes and in the way you have cast it, you have to execute him.

That's true. Any judge would have to follow the prescription of the law, even if he or she didn't agree with it.

 

[Alex756]

Nothing excused taking the life of that many children. Who can say one of those kids would not have been more important to society.

Anyways, nothing mitigated what crimes were commited.

No reason that everyone should not be treated equally under the law. However, I am of the opinion anyone that brilliant could not be right in the head, so if I were the defence I would have a panal of psychologists and try to get him commited for life.

-Alex

 

[LadyJeanne]

Yikes, what a cheerful thread.

Equal treatment under the law. You murder a bunch of kids, you get whatever penalty is legal in your state no matter who you are or what you might have accomplished in any other arena.

 

[Shendude]

loading the dice are you? Must your character be EVERYTHING good? There aren't any polymaths of the sort you posit, you know. No one that makes great art, great medicine, great mathematical discoveries. good, yes, greater than anyone in 200 years- no. knock him back some, make him more realistic, and then we can start talking about it!

basically what you are asking is- if someone is valuable to society in one way and detrimental in another way- which way should our judgement go?

We have actually had some parallel issues in the past. The nazi scientists and doctors made enormous headway into many medical questions, by callously using Jewish prisoners as test subjects. They learned much about treatments for hypothermia, starvation, pain. I leave it to your imagination as to how they learned these things.

Should we use that knowledge, or should we ignore it because of the way it was gathered?

He's over the top on purpose, otherwise, IMO, there wouldn't be a question.

The thing to note is this: through his work he has SAVED millions of lives. If you execute him, or stick him in prison, you are very likely depriving millions more of THEIR lives. And that's not counting the massive contribution to humanity that will be lost.

Is justice for a mere 46 children REALLY worth dooming millions? Do you have the right to rob the future of the wonders he can create?

 

[Typo Fu Master]

He's toast. Sad, for the loss of all that knowledge, but if we start making exceptions, it just opens the door later on for someone not as "worthy" to get out of their just desserts. The only compromise I can think of would be to con him out of as much knowledge as possible before he's executed.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

He's over the top on purpose, otherwise, IMO, there wouldn't be a question.

The thing to note is this: through his work he has SAVED millions of lives. If you execute him, or stick him in prison, you are very likely depriving millions more of THEIR lives. And that's not counting the massive contribution to humanity that will be lost.

Is justice for a mere 46 children REALLY worth dooming millions and robbing the future of the fruits of his labor?

If you decide justice isn't applicable to even one person, then you no longer have justice.

 

[LadyJeanne]

Is justice for a mere 46 children REALLY worth dooming millions and robbing the future of the fruits of his labor?

Yes, it is.

 

[rgraham666]

Not dealing with this one.

Extreme hypothetical examples are a poor thing to base thought on.

 

[Typo Fu Master]

Is justice for a mere 46 children REALLY worth dooming millions? Do you have the right to rob the future of the wonders he can create?

One innocent death is too many, even if it means depriving future generations of hypothetical wonders. If I am deprived of a flying car that runs on salt water because a killer was executed for his crimes, I could feel better about humanity than if he were allowed to live.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Well i wouldn't kill him......but i'd sure as hell make him suffer! Slice off his manhood, cut off all of his toes, cut off one of his arms, and on his other arm remove his middle finger, cut off his right ear, and pop out one of his eyeballs....and remove all of his teeth.

He's not dead and not healthy...but he can still help out the nation or whatever.....oh yea and rip out his hair so it doesn't grow back.

It would be really nice to do all these things, and I would happily volunteer for the privilege of helping do them, but it would not be permitted under the Constitution. In that case, put him to death in the normal way.

 

[Liar]

Judge the crimes, not the criminal. Period.

Is justice for a mere 46 children REALLY worth dooming millions and robbing the future of the fruits of his labor?

Those are hypothetical fruits. There is no guarantee that he will do what his lawyers claim. I assume that you wouldn't let him roam free...then what? Life in prison? House arrest? Or even if he IS set free - the mother of all social stigmata. He could easily get depressed, and won't be able to prduce anything good at all anyway.

And if we are to weigh in hypothetical outcomes...

What if one of the children he murdered would have grown up to become an even bigger genius? Or be brave and fotunate enough to stop WWIII?

 

[Pure]

OK, so it's 'fruits' that are key.

Is justice for a mere 46 children REALLY worth dooming millions and robbing the future of the fruits of his labor?

Why not extend this 'fruits' idea, as a 'stay out of jail card'.
Assess past fruits and present likelihood of further ones for the good of humanity. If the answer is 'nil' (or less), jail, restrict (ghetto style), or expel those. Let all those with substantial positive rating do what they please, and of course, if they're so damn smart--like the MENSA folks are alleged to be--they will figure how not to get done in by one of 'theirs.'

 

[Quiet_Cool]

Kill him.

Or... Perhaps not. Maybe let him off all charges, then release the information of his admittance to the press, explaining when and where he'll he exiting the courthouse... without security or police escort. If he's that damned talented and smart, maybe he'll find a way home with his head attached. Of course, we might want to announce his home address in that statement to the press...

Q_C

 

[R. Richard]

If you decide justice isn't applicable to even one person, then you no longer have justice.

As usual, Colly has nailed it!

 

[SummerMorning]

And if we are to weigh in hypothetical outcomes...

What if one of the children he murdered would have grown up to become an even bigger genius? Or be brave and fotunate enough to stop WWIII?

Ahh, but what if one of the children murdered would have CAUSED WWW3?

Actually, a rather funny premise that - a state with a death penalty. Most countries don't have the death penalty, far as I know, and I am against it anyway.

As Gandhi put it so succintly: An eye for an eye will make us all blind.

By analogy: A head for a head will leave us all dead.

 

[oggbashan]

In the UK we have abolished the death penalty so the question is irrelevant.

We wouldn't extradite him to a place that might impose the death penalty without an assurance that, whatever he was found guilty of, he would NOT be executed.

Og

 

[R. Richard]

"Now, his lawyers make the argument that, for all the heinousness [nailed it!] of his crimes, his brilliance is too valuable to be lost."

Counter argument by prosecutor: "We put him in jail. He then murders again, while in jail. Now what?"

 

[Boxlicker101]

"Now, his lawyers make the argument that, for all the heinousness [nailed it!] of his crimes, his brilliance is too valuable to be lost."

Counter argument by prosecutor: "We put him in jail. He then murders again, while in jail. Now what?"

If he is a person who tortures and kills children, he probably wouldn't kill anybody in prison.

Although I favor hanging the son of a bitch, and would gladly volunteer to tie the rope, preferably an old one, around his neck, putting him in prison might do the job even better. Instead of going through endless appeals, none of them having any virtue, some other prisoner would do the world a favor and stick a shiv in him.

Everybody, including convicts, hates those who torture and murder children, or bloodthirsty killers in general. That's what happened to Jeffrey Dahlmer in Wisconsin, which has no death penalty. That's what will, hopefully, happen to the Green River Killer in Washington and BTK in Kansas. It's a shame that prisoners should have to do the dirty work of society, but that's the way it is sometimes.

 

[cymry]

I agree

If you decide justice isn't applicable to even one person, then you no longer have justice.

Once you make a special case for someone, that special case can be applied to anyone for one reason or another. If you disagree with the death penalty then don't commit the crime that earns it.
The death penalty is harsh, yes, but so is murder. If it is done away with we've essentially let responsibility go out the window. Too many people avoid the consequences of their actions today as it is.

For your proposed serial killer? A bullet through the brain. No muss, no fuss.

 

[Liar]

As Gandhi put it so succintly: An eye for an eye will make us all blind.

By analogy: A head for a head will leave us all dead.

If someone gives me head, I'll return the favor