Denied parole - AGAIN!
-
Thank God this savage has been denied parole again...guaranteed to be behind bars for AT LEAST two more years. http://tinyurl.com/mj5x5pu
-
LiveForever:
Thank God this savage has been denied parole again...guaranteed to be behind bars for AT LEAST two more years. http://tinyurl.com/mj5x5pu
http://www.thewrap.com/john-lennons-killer-denied-parole-for-eighth-time/ It's amazing. If this murder was asked to leave the premises than just hand around around a public sidewalk, in front of The Dakota, everything would have been better.
-
If they ever did let him out, he probably wouldn't last a week.
-
Why is his name posted? He is the worm who must never be named!
-
beatlesfanrandy:
Why is his name posted? He is the worm who must never be named!
Thread title revised.
THANK YOU, (((((PAUL)))))!!! WE LOVE YOU!!!
-
Nancy R:
If they ever did let him out, he probably wouldn't last a week.
Agreed, Nancy.
-
Good! That creep should be kept in prison for life and should not even be granted that at all! Just like the jerk that nearly killed George never should have been released either! The NERVE!
That really made me so made that the creep who hurt George was released...Im still ranting about it! Makes me glad Olivia hit the guy over the head with a table lamp the jerk diserved it!!!!!!!! 
but as for the one who is in jail now he should NEVER be relased! -
Triplets Love Paul:
beatlesfanrandy:
Why is his name posted? He is the worm who must never be named!
Thread title revised.
The creep's name is still in the link above.
-
Honestly, who cares? It's not like censoring his name is going to change what happened. It's a legitimate news story, so people should be able to post what they want. Even prisoners deserve rights and just because he attacked a celebrity doesn't mean he should have them revoked and be denied parole hearings. Let's be honest, if he hadn't killed John Lennon he would already have been released at this point.
-
Ane:
Honestly, who cares? It's not like censoring his name is going to change what happened. It's a legitimate news story, so people should be able to post what they want. Even prisoners deserve rights and just because he attacked a celebrity doesn't mean he should have them revoked and be denied parole hearings. Let's be honest, if he hadn't killed John Lennon he would already have been released at this point.
Many people care, Ane. Paul published a poem about it. It's out of respect for Lennon and his family that we do not speak or publish the killer's name. It's been that way for years. We do not want to give him the notoriety that he sought when he pulled the trigger. It isn't about his rights, it's about our rights! One sad truth is that not releasing him has probably prolonged his life by many years. Regardless, myself and others do not choose to look in his eyes or see his name.
-
The murderer's full name was printed in the McCartney Years booklet, so I don't think it's something even Paul feels very strongly about it at this point. Bottom line, if people don't want to acknowledge his existance or read news about him, wouldn't it be easier to just avoid threads like these?
-
Nancy R:
Triplets Love Paul:
beatlesfanrandy:
Why is his name posted? He is the worm who must never be named!
Thread title revised.
The creep's name is still in the link above.
Don't know if you've all seen The Human Centipede...... but I'm thinking the t*u#rd of an individual (who we won't mention) should be sewed right in the middle. And I'd be feeding his mate at the front a hell of a lot of baked beans.
-
Honest mistake...didn't mean to offend anyone
-
Nancy R:
Triplets Love Paul:
beatlesfanrandy:
Why is his name posted? He is the worm who must never be named!
Thread title revised.
The creep's name is still in the link above.
Hi Nancy, sorry to see that you are confused. For those who are sensitive to seeing his name in print and subscribe to the theory of refusing to give John's killer the world's attention he sought by killing John, I had revised the title of this thread which originally included the name of John's killer. I cannot control how the New York Daily News formats their article links. For the purpose of this thread, I have now submitted the article link to TinyURL, editing the link in both the original post and the quoted post. I hope this helps to clear your confusion and relieves any anguish some may have experienced in seeing the name within the link. Anita
THANK YOU, (((((PAUL)))))!!! WE LOVE YOU!!!
-
I was not confused. I knew that you had removed his name from the title, but was stating that it still (unfortunately) appeared in the link. I guess I shouldn't have used the
emoticon. Should have used Thanks for changing the link though. -
Who'da thought that sharing, what I perceived to be a relieving story would cause so much drama. Been a Beatles fan my whole life like most on this thread and somehow never heard that. I truly didn't mean to offend or insult anyone.
-
This is truly not a topic I even wish to see here, let alone discuss.
-
beatlesfanrandy:
This is truly not a topic I even wish to see here, let alone discuss.
C'mon Randy, then why do you keep posting to this thread? LiveForever just posted a link to the article if anyone wanted to read it--as far as I'm concerned LiveForever didn't do anything wrong by posting it and it was the appropriate forum in which to post the link.
-
Then don't join the discussion. Pretty simple.
-
Thanks Erik...as a Beatles fan (and historian of all kinds) I am puzzled by some of the reaction. This past November marked the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy assassination and it was all over the place...as it should be. It was an event that changed the world...a tragic one mind you, but it shouldn't be censored. This is the first time I've seen such a reaction to 34-year old news story.
