Violet Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 McALESTER, Okla. — A 23-year-old inmate beaten to death at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary had been put in a cell with convicted killer he had testified against. Prison spokesman Jerry Massie says Paul Duran Jr. fought with one cellmate and then was put in a cell with Jessie James Dalton. Duran was found beaten to death about 15 minutes later. Massie says the two were not supposed to be put in the same cell and prison officials are trying to determine how it happened. Duran and Dalton were co-defendants in the January 2002 shooting death of Billy Wayne Ray in Oklahoma City. Duran pleaded guilty to a robbery charge and testified against Dalton who was convicted of murder and sentenced to life without parole. Massie says investigators will present their findings to a district attorney who will decide if criminal charges will be filed. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Really, people? That's absolutely ridiculous! Anyone else have any thoughts? Oh and here's the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffire Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Perhaps the guards will be charged with accessory to murder? Aw, who am I kidding? Of course not! :laugh3: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pseudonym Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 That's pretty funny actually If he was weak enough to be beaten to death by one man he wouldn't have lasted long in a prison like that anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 ^^ Well, it's not really their fault that he got in there in the first place, so I wouldn't think that'd be the case...although they should've known that something like this would happen. ^ You have to understand that the killer in question was really pissed. He probably had a BUNCH of adrenaline helping him in order to beat the poor guy down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pseudonym Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 ^ You have to understand that the killer in question was really pissed. He probably had a BUNCH of adrenaline helping him in order to beat the poor guy down. still. the guy probably woulda gotten beaten down by a gang of people eventually. you're telling make this guy without parole wouldn't have found a different way to get his revenge? shoulda put him in a different prison oh well, that's what happens when you break the law;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 You get viciously beaten by a guy you helped convict in order to make things at least somewhat right? I understand that he himself broke the law, but that doesn't mean he should've died in that manner at all. That's a horrible way for anyone to die. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pseudonym Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 You get viciously beaten by a guy you helped convict in order to make things at least somewhat right? I understand that he himself broke the law, but that doesn't mean he should've died in that manner at all. That's a horrible way for anyone to die. :( well if he never broke the law in the first place, it wouldn't have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 True, but you can't think about what could have happened, because that didn't happen. This is how it turned out, and there's nothing anyone anything can do to change it. :\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pseudonym Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 which is why the lesson you should take is this: don't break the law, and you definitely won't die getting beat up in prison;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 :laugh3: True. Perhaps this'll teach some people to think twice before they commit questionable activities. It may prevent other people from facing similar fates. :happy: See? There's a silver lining in every cloud. :wacky: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffire Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 which is why the lesson you should take is this: don't break the law, and you definitely won't die getting beat up in prison;) It's easy for you to say that until someone sends you to prison for a crime you didn't commit. Framing people is quite easy. You just have to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. In this case it strikes me as a clear example of the evils of the state. First, they offer him a deal if he testifies against someone, then they put him in the same cage as the guy he testifies against. I was in jail recently (a couple of weeks ago) for a grand total of 3 days. It wasn't a maximum security prison, but it was a real county jail. I didn't commit a crime, the police officer lied on my arrest warrant. The crime I was charged with was "hindering an officer" (because they claimed I was attempting to keep my brother from getting arrested for underage drinking). I'm currently out on $5000 personal recognizance bail. The government has sent me three different letters with three different dates on them, all written in CAPITAL LETTERS and threatening to arrest me and take $5000 from me if I don't show up to court on a specific date at a specific time. What if I were to send someone a letter written in ALL CAPITALS demanding they meet me somewhere otherwise I'll kidnap them and steal $5000 from them? How much jail time would I receive for that? It's hard to say. My point is that attempting to justify all the actions of the state on the basis of law, rather than ethics, is a dangerous path to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pseudonym Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 I'm not saying the system is perfect. But the guy pleaded guilty to robbery, so he pleaded guilty to breaking the law. He then got beaten to death. Oh well, he shouldn't have broken the law. I'm not saying that he deserved to be killed, I'm just saying it could have been avoided altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffire Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 I'm not saying the system is perfect. But the guy pleaded guilty to robbery, so he pleaded guilty to breaking the law. He then got beaten to death. Oh well, he shouldn't have broken the law. I'm not saying that he deserved to be killed, I'm just saying it could have been avoided altogether. By the same token, the murder victim could have been carrying a gun. But he wasn't, so he got what was coming to him! Oh well, it could have been avoided altogether. EDIT: There is no such thing as a perfect justice system. But we can also easily say that monopolies never have our best interests at heart. Our current justice system is a monopoly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pseudonym Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 But he couldn't have been carrying a gun in prison. They would have taken a gun away. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck kottke Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Amendment VIII "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted." & part of Amendment V.: "...nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" Lord only knows how many are in prison for minor drug-related "crimes" when they really ought not be there, or be sent to jail rather than prison. Corrections is supposed to be about correcting people, not cruel or indifferent treatment towards them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffire Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 But he couldn't have been carrying a gun in prison. They would have taken a gun away. ;) I'm referring to the original murder victim, not the guy in the jail cell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 In this case it strikes me as a clear example of the evils of the state. First, they offer him a deal if he testifies against someone, then they put him in the same cage as the guy he testifies against. That's the thing; the two weren't supposed to be put in the same cell to begin with. They had put the inmate in a different cell, then somehow he got moved with the other guy, and this resulted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Rose Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Fair play to the murderer, who wouldn't have done the same if the person who helped sent you down gets put in the same room as you? But Doh on the prison officer who put them together by mistake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonsun Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Smart move. That was a really good decision: "I know, let's put this guy in a cell with a murderer he put in jail!" The world is sooo sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 The world is quite depressing indeed. We can keep in mind, however, that not everything is that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now