Even though Baseball-Reference has Edwin Gasque as still being alive!

I turned in the update, in case anyone was wondering.

Sad story.

That story did not brighten my Monday morning.


"I got good at it (safecracking)," he said. By 1953, he was serving a four-year prison sentence for burglary.

If you're good at it, you don't get caught. The killer sounds like a real, general purpose scumbag.

The killer sounds like a real, general purpose scumbag.

Yup. The amazing part is he got paroled, and then of course beat someone senseless and got sent right back up the river.

Not sure how a guy who shot two cops in one day (killing one) gets parole though.

He pitched so well for two years, the Cleveland Indians drafted him and gave him a $25,000 bonus and a ticket to the minor leagues.[emphasis added]

I think Cleveland just scouted him and signed him to a contract. The draft didn't start until 1965.

Fifty years after Addison killed Eddie Gasque, the enormity of what he did is not lost on him.

"Am I sorry? Of course. Look what it did to his family and to mine. I took his life and ruined mine."



Sounds like he is much more sorry about ruining his own life than taking someone's life.

When guys get parole, #### it up and get sent back to jail, they should have to write letters of apology to every single inmate who is eligible for parole.
Nobody remembers the 87 guys who became solid citizens if #88 gets out and commits some horrible crime.

Not sure how a guy who shot two cops in one day (killing one) gets parole though.

After only serving 20 years -- not that long given the severity of the crimes and prior record.

Not sure how a guy who shot two cops in one day (killing one) gets parole though.

He'd been in jail for 20 years at that point, which they probably considered to be a sufficient amount of time for him to have been rehabilitated (since he learned how to be a dental technician or whatever).

Apparently, they were wrong.

He'd been in jail for 20 years at that point, which they probably considered to be a sufficient amount of time for him to have been rehabilitated (since he learned how to be a dental technician or whatever).

Apparently, they were wrong.

This a major problem with the anti-death penalty position. People promote life in prison as an alternative, but then life ends up often being <20 years, and the guy gets out to committ more crimes.

If life doesn't mean life for a cop killer, who was already a felon, and prison escapee, it has no meaning.

He'd been in jail for 20 years at that point, which they probably considered to be a sufficient amount of time for him to have been rehabilitated (since he learned how to be a dental technician or whatever).

Apparently, they were wrong.

Wanting to necome a dental technician should have clued them in that something wasn't right...

This a major problem with the anti-death penalty position. People promote life in prison as an alternative, but then life ends up often being <20 years, and the guy gets out to committ more crimes.

If life doesn't mean life for a cop killer, who was already a felon, and prison escapee, it has no meaning.

So the problem with the death penalty is the alternative, because there's no way that the alternative could be fixed, right?

Got it. Easier to just kill 'em.

Not sure how a guy who shot two cops in one day (killing one) gets parole though.

Yeah, they were so tough on crime back in the olden days.

This a major problem with the anti-death penalty position.

It's not just a major problem, it's THE problem, just like Type I errors are THE problem with the pro-death penalty position.

Both can have unjust and horrific consequences that can shake one's faith in the justice system.

Gus Polidor was born the same day Gasque was shot. 33 years later, Polidor was also killed by robbers.

This a major problem with the anti-death penalty position. People promote life in prison as an alternative, but then life ends up often being <20 years, and the guy gets out to committ more crimes.

Seems like a fairly minor fix, if you're worried about that. Just increase the minimum sentence for the offense.

Beats the hell out of accidentally killing an innocent man.

This a major problem with the anti-death penalty position. People promote life in prison as an alternative, but then life ends up often being <20 years, and the guy gets out to committ more crimes.

You're pro death penalty? How do you reconcile that with the Church's teachings?

This Gasque fellow sure had some control problems, huh?

You're pro death penalty? How do you reconcile that with the Church's teachings?

The Church's position on the death penalty is (as it always has been) that it is permissible. It is up to the competent civil authorities of each country to determine if it is necessary. Catholics are free to oppose or support the death penalty based on their judgement.

See section 3 of the letter from (then) Cardinal Ratzinger.

http://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm

It's not just a major problem, it's THE problem, just like Type I errors are THE problem with the pro-death penalty position.

Both can have unjust and horrific consequences that can shake one's faith in the justice system.

Well put.

Seems like a fairly minor fix, if you're worried about that. Just increase the minimum sentence for the offense.

Beats the hell out of accidentally killing an innocent man.

Apparently not, since convicted murderers rarely actually die in prison.

Apparently not, since convicted murderers rarely actually die in prison.

I don't understand this argument. Are you suggesting it's not a minor fix, as evidenced by the fact that it has not been fixed yet?

The problem with my front gutter requires a minor fix, but I haven't done it yet, either.

Apparently not, since convicted murderers rarely actually die in prison.

Since when is "convicted murderers dying in prison" supposed to be the goal?

I don't understand this argument. Are you suggesting it's not a minor fix, as evidenced by the fact that it has not been fixed yet?

Yes. People have been talking about "life-without-parole" for decades, yet almost all murderers seem to be paroled eventually.

Since when is "convicted murderers dying in prison" supposed to be the goal?

It's the goal of life-without-parole.

If we are to be convinced that life imprisonment is a suitable punishment for crimes so heinous they would normally call for execution, we have to be convinced life means life.

If someone can commit a horrible murder, with the aggravating circumstances that typically call for execution (rape, multiple or serial killings, murder of a policeman or prison guard, etc.), and conceivable be walking the streets at age 50 or 60, then justice is gravely injured.

Yes. People have been talking about "life-without-parole" for decades, yet almost all murderers seem to be paroled eventually.

Unless you can show some actual numbers behind this assertion, along with an even basic explanation as to why you think this cannot be fixed (other than, "Well, it hasn't so far,") this seems like a pretty silly argument.

It's the goal of life-without-parole.

Where did we say that "life-without-parole" should be the goal, either?

You said that less than 20 years was too little, so I said you could raise the number of years.

with the aggravating circumstances that typically call for execution

"Aggravating circumstances" only "call for execution" if you believe in the death penalty.

I hope the bastard dies alone in jail of a miserable death. What a waste of humanity.