i think it’s probably true, most cases like this are

Stupid jurors, he would HATE sharing jail time with straight men. He would've loved staying in a gals prison with the hags!

"Sounds like" isn't a valid argument.

Yeah, the entirety of America have always had such relaxed views on gays, right?

So you agree with giving gay people a harsher sentence than straight people?

What were you saying previously about imaging words not said! Please tell me where I either said or suggested that. God forbid!

I assumed by the fact that you were minimizing the story and bring the PC bull**** into it that you were fine with someone being given a harsher sentence because of their sexuality. Why don't you clear that up for me?

Do you agree with it or not?

Not Brillo thinking that South Dakota is PC :umm2:. I think perhaps you have a vast misunderstanding of the United States, Brillo.

Juries are flawed. That's why they have to be very mindful during selection to make sure they are not picking candidates who are biased against their client(s) in even a subtle way. On the other side of that coin, juries will deliver lighter sentences to candidates on the basis of their attractiveness, for example, that a pretty woman is not as capable of a heinous crime as say a male with numerous body tattoos... if their lawyer has any sense, they will appeal (and win).

Not in their hearts maybe but they are unlikely to be so blatant about it are they - not if they value their jobs! The PC bogie man will be after them.

No, not at all.

:skull:

It's South Dakota... I know you like to push this 'PC gone mad' narrative but it pays to actually know what you're talking about when it comes to the states and their attitudes.

I know jack all about SD, but that last part was pretty funny.

I dont think we can assume the validity of any story, but for all we know the truth is somewhere in the middle... the media can be trigger happy but their narrative still nail the issue all the same. It could also be a really bad joke... but I think warrants an appeal either way if the comments can be held up in appeals court. Maybe jury misconduct.

Gotta Catch 'Em All ♪

Your response is not only pointless but the repetitive nature of it demonstrates you know little more about America than you accuse me of. Simply repeating what others havee said achieves nothing and doesn’t demonstrate any knowledge on your part. All mouth and no trousers as they say!

Well he committed a murder, so I don’t really care about the convicted’s sexuality...

Though nothing against the LGBT...

sounds like fake news and a facebook omg story to me

Gay or not his crime deserves the death penalty, one which i believe would have been given in the end without all this hullabaloo.

That makes no sense at all, like, AT ALL.

But whatever, you've already shown your lack of knowledge, saying 'I know you are but what am I?' won't change that. You do you, sis.

Except the point is that it looks like he's been sentenced to death because of his sexuality, going by the story, they would have sentenced him to life imprisonment if he was straight. That's the problem.

That's not the point though, the point is has he been sentenced harsher than a straight man would for the same crime which is completely wrong regardless of the circumstances.

"may"

the good news is he is being killed so the families of the victim can get closure

Is there anything to compare this sentencing with. Like what pushes it over from life to the death penalty? They surely must have some guidelines? Not just it being left to a set of jurors personalities

I guess its the same as sitting on the jury thinking I dont want this child killer to go to jail for 30 years wanking over what he did, watching baseball and reading books and chatting, id rather he die right now for the sake of the victim families

I know what I would prefer and chose

exactly, there must be a choice at all these murder trials, and it's not like the guy was taken straight out and dealt with. There will be reviews/appeals etc and if any bias or persecution was evident in the trial it would be thrown out

Yeah but this guy wasn't a child killer though was he? I mean like a serial killer or someone who tortured their victim or whatever, is more severe than someone who just stabbed someone to death (not that that's great or anything) but you know what I mean, is there a line from "just killing a person" that needs to be crossed (to multiple killings or particularly cruel killings) to say you would give the person the death penalty or could be allowed give them the death penalty because there should be I think otherwise it's a pretty unfair system