Lynda Marie Kirby sexually abused her young son in ways more horrible than anyone could imagine, and she should have had to pay a steep price for her crimes.
Kirby was orginally sentenced to 125 years in prison and was supposed to remain in prison for half that time — 62 1/2 years — before she became eligible for parole.
But the case was reversed on appeal; the prosecution couldn't retry the case because it couldn't expose the child to testifying against his mother a second time. Kirby ended up getting only two years in prison in return for a guilty plea. She will have to register as a sex offender for the rest of her life.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,280413,00.html#ixzz283qNSPdT

is the death penalty effective???

>>1 Considering how the person in question ends up... Er... Dead, I'd have to say it's effective in a case-by-case sense.

As a deterrent, there's lots of argument about that. Some people think it works well, others think it isn't deterring people enough and is a waste of money that needs to be eliminated.

I think it should be used more frequently. Not as a deterrent, but as an ultimate punishment. After you've acquired X # of years in jail, you're killed because you're an unnecessary expense. If you killed another person, you're killed in return. That would be a more useful death penalty system in my opinion.

I thought the death penalty was for those who killed someone.

Even as a left winger, I support the death penalty.

I'm sorry if anyone doesn't agree with me, but I think that she should either get the death penalty or rot in jail. Children don't deserve to go through things like that, humans are absurd. -_-

I'm more interested in what she actually did to him...because I can imagine some pretty horrible things.