death penalty news October 6, 2004
MASSACHUSETTS: Kokoros against same sex marriage, for capital punishment Charles Kokoros, candidate for state representative, does not support same sex marriages and would vote in favor of a constitutional amendment. He feels the Massachusetts Supreme Court failed the people in their interpretation of the definition of marriage as written in our constitution. Kokoros believes the framers of the Constitution did not intend the wording to allow same sex marriages. He stated "We must put ourselves in the mindset of those who wrote the Constitution and there is no way they would have ever supported same sex marriages." Kokoros will work hard to put pressure on all lawmakers to place the question of a constitutional amendment on the ballot. I firmly believe the voice of the people should be heard and they should decide the definition of marriage. "Let our children grow up understanding marriage for what I believe it really is, between a man and a woman," stressed Kokoros. Kokoros will work with Governor Romney to bring the vote to the citizens of Massachusetts. Kokoros stressed his support for the death penalty for those who commit first degree murder. "The liberals that control the legislature have blocked this measure again and again" stated Kokoros. He feels that with all the DNA testing and technology we have available now is the time to hold Killers accountable with capital punishment. He believes that the death penalty will be a deterrent to those criminals who are looking to take the next step in their criminal career. "When murderers are executed for their brutal crimes, the message will be loud and clear to all those who even think about killing" stressed Kokoros. The SJC blocked the death penalty from being reinstated in the eighties stating it was unconstitutional. The closest the death penalty has come to passing was in 1997 when the house defeated it with an 80 to 80 tie. "I will stand up for the victims and vote for capital punishment," stated Kokoros. "We have a governor who supports capital punishment and I will work with him to make it happen." (source: Braintree Forum) ------------------- Candidates' Corner: How would you vote on gay marriage and capital punishment? Murphy opposes gay marriage and capital punishment Rep. James Murphy opposes gay marriage and capital punishment "I support marriage as between one man and one woman only. "I also support civil unions by which two individuals may enter into a legal relationship in which legal rights and responsibilities are conferred upon each other. "Most importantly, I believe that this is an issue which should be decided by each individual member of our society and not by judges within the judicial branch. During the last legislative session, I voted to put this question directly to the voters," he said. "I oppose capital punishment. Prior to being elected state representative I served as an attorney and judicial clerk assigned to the Massachusetts Appeals Court which hears statewide criminal appeals including murder appeals. "I also served as an assistant district attorney prosecuting criminal cases throughout the city of Boston. "The cases I prosecuted consisted of drug cases, gun cases, domestic violence cases, and assault and battery cases, among others. One thing I have learned through my legal education at Suffolk University Law School, my time as an attorney and judicial clerk hearing murder appeals, and my time as a criminal prosecutor, is that the judicial system is not a perfect one and it will never be. "One has to look only so far as the many overturned convictions of death row inmates exonerated due to faulty investigations, mistakes in the courtroom, or new evidence. "As a former prosecutor, I believe that individuals who commit crimes should be held fully accountable for those crimes. "However, knowing first hand that the judicial system is not a perfect one, I cannot support capital punishment by which an innocent person will inevitably be put to death. Death is a sentence which can never be reversed," he said. Copy A in box The News is carrying candidates corner until Oct. 27. We are asking state representative candidates James Murphy and Doug Veeder a question each week. The News welcomes ideas for questions. Email them to [email protected]. Veeder: gay marriage should be the people's decision, backs capital punishment State representative candidate Doug Veeder believes gay marriage should be the people's decision. "On July 17, 2002, a traditional marriage amendment initiated by the citizens was before the Constitutional Convention. Former Senate President Thomas Birmingham, who was against the amendment and supported same sex marriage, adjourned the session without a vote on this important initiative. The Legislature failed to fulfill and execute their duty to discuss, debate, and vote on an important issue. "The Constitutional Convention was adjourned. This left the decision on same sex marriage in the hands of the unelected Supreme Judicial Court. Last November, the court determined that gay partners could not be denied their right to marry. "The current amendment is a blatant disregard for the people of Massachusetts. Instead of offering two questions on the ballot in 2006, the current amendment forces the Finneran-Travalini bill into existence. I do not support this amendment. "Our state legislature should address the issue in an honest forum for the people of Massachusetts. I support splitting the current amendment into two questions: 1) Should marriage be defined as a union between a man and a woman? 2) Should civil unions be created for gay and lesbian couples? I believe in supporting the will of the electorate. In order to honor the will of the electorate, the legislature must give the people an honest forum in which to voice their conscience. Veeder supports the death penalty with appropriate safeguards. "The death penalty is an important issue that deserves serious consideration. I believe there are some crimes in this world that deserve the ultimate penalty. Some would argue that everyone has certain indisputable rights. However, I believe that when you commit a horrendous crime such as murder, you relinquish these rights. "Murder is a crime that leaves many victims irreversibly scarred for life. Murder is a crime that leaves a void in the community. It simply cannot be tolerated, and should be punished. "I believe that the death penalty can serve as a deterrent. Some may disagree, and point to selective statistics to prove their case. However, if it prevents just one murder, I believe it has served its purpose as a deterrent, and I believe that the family of that potential victim would probably agree. "The current proposal for the death penalty includes a requirement for positive DNA evidence. It has set up safeguards to diminish the possibility of a wrongful conviction in a capital case. I would also be in favor of adding another safeguard; the jury who convicted the individual of the crime would decide the defendant's fate. This would take the death penalty out of the hands of a DA or a judge and place it back with a jury. One dissension among the jury and the death penalty would not be the punishment for the crime," he said. (source: Weymouth News)
