Beltway sniper John Allen Muhammad to be executed in Virginia [Updated]
Beltway sniper John Allen Muhammad is scheduled to be executed this evening in Virginia.
[Updated Wednesday: Muhammad's execution was carried out Tuesday night.]
According to the article by Times reporter David G. Savage, Muhammad was convicted in 2003 of the shooting rampage that occurred the year before. Of the 16 people shot, 10 died.
U.S. Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft made the choice seven years ago to send Muhammad, then 41, and his teenage accomplice, Lee Boyd Malvo, to Virginia to be tried despite the fact that more of the mayhem took place in Maryland.
In 2002, Maryland had put the death penalty on hold because of racial unfairness. So while only three of the killings took place in Virginia, a death sentence was a possibility in that state. Thus Ashcroft chose Virginia to hold the trial.
Malvo was convicted of the murders, but because of his young age, he was sentenced to life in prison without parole.
The prosecution and families of the victims have said they are comforted by the sentence. The Supreme Court justices turned down a final emergency appeal from Muhammad's lawyers that he needed more time to develop his appeals since the process has taken place at a rapid pace.
So the question is, is this execution happening too quickly? Was it right that Muhammad was tried in Virginia instead of Maryland? Or do you agree with the speedy execution?
-- Kelsey Ramos
Photo: John Allen Muhammad listens to the jury's recommendation of death in Virginia Beach Circuit Court on November 24, 2003. Credit: Getty Images
During his youth, Sanchez was an active member of MS-13. After violating parole in 1994, Sanchez was deported to his home country of El Salvador. He returned to the United States a year later and formally renounced his affiliations with MS-13. He would go on to help organize the local chapter of Homies Unidos, an nonprofit organization dedicated to gang violence prevention.
Sanchez gained notoriety a few years ago when authorities attempted to deport him a second time. Several notable figures came to Sanchez's aid, including former state Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Los Angeles), who testified in his defense. He was eventually granted political asylum after it was found that he had been harassed by the LAPD.
The original L.A. Now article on the arrest has spurred a significant amount of debate. Many readers contended that Sanchez should not have been granted political asylum, and they were critical of gang outreach programs.
"Ho hum. The only ones shocked are those that haven't been reading the paper for YEARS. It's old news that the government is paying "former" gang members to do "outreach." Yes, your tax dollars are funding gang crime and killings. Disgusting and stupid, but no one really cares," wrote windu.
"Silly to think that he actually left MS-13! Silly court to have overturned the deportation and let him stay in the country AFTER he had re-entered illegally! Silly Tom Hayden! Why must we spend tax dollars prosecuting and incarcerating these vicious criminals? I say send them back to their country of origin to rot in their jails! Enough of this!!!! And this is coming from a self-described latino lefty liberal! I am so tired of politicians in general and Latino politicians in particular who don't have the guts to say no to illegal immigration, no to gangs, no to lawlessness because they fear losing face with their latino constituents," said Frankie.
(Read more after the jump)