Woman pleads in death of Ohio pregnant woman

[The Straight Story]

Woman pleads in death of Ohio pregnant woman

By JOE MILICIA


CANTON, Ohio (AP) -- A woman pleaded guilty Monday to two counts in the slaying of a pregnant woman, including helping dispose of her body, and agreed to testify against the northeast Ohio police officer accused in the killing.

Myisha Ferrell, 30, of Canton, quietly entered her guilty pleas in Stark County Common Pleas Court. The plea deal came minutes before her jury trial was to begin in the death of Jessie Davis, 26, who was missing for several days before an extensive search turned up her body.

Ferrell admitted to obstructing justice - she lied to authorities investigating Davis' death - and complicity to gross abuse of a corpse.

Ferrell was sentenced to two years in prison and will be eligible for release after one year, according to the terms of her plea agreement. She had faced up to six years in prison if convicted on both counts.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OH_PREGNANT_WOMAN_DEAD_OHOL-?SITE=WBNSTV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[...of J.Temperance]

1. Proving that

There's NO justice there....this POS gets two years, and she can get released in a year.

The proper punishment SHOULD be that this POS gets sent to the Death House, given ONE appeal and if that appeal is turned down, the POS gets executed within 30 days.

THAT WOULD have happened, had it not have been for all the anti-Death Penalty crowd whining and crying about how "inhumane" the Death Penalty is.

What's inhumane is what POS like this POS do....murder and abuse INNOCENT people.

[terisan]

2. I don't think she murdered or knew about the murder until the murderer told her. She is guilty

apparently of helping him cover up the crime and dispose of body. Sounds gruesome enough but unclear whether she was acting under threat.

She clearly had duty to notify police or FBI, if she was afraid to notify police (murderer was police officer).

[...of J.Temperance]

3. It says:

"A woman pleaded guilty Monday to two counts in the slaying of a pregnant woman, including helping dispose of her body, and agreed to testify against the northeast Ohio police officer accused in the killing."


That the POS pleaded guilty to "two counts in the slaying of a pregnant woman, including helping dispose of her body."


That appears to me, that the POS had a hand in the woman's death.

[rox63]

5. They probably needed her testimony against the person who actually did the killing

if they wanted enough evidence to convict him.

It looks from the article that the actual murderer was a police officer.

[...of J.Temperance]

8. Should she be

Just getting two years and she's out in a year?

What sort of punishment is that? Heck, it's a joke, is what it is, and a sick one at that....someone who commits an armed robbery with no fatality involved, they'd get more than two years.


On Edit: Dammit spelling error

[uppityperson]

7. Here is what she pled to, obstructing justing and gross abuse of a corpse

Ferrell admitted to obstructing justice - she lied to authorities investigating Davis' death - and complicity to gross abuse of a corpse. (corpse means a dead body, hence not a hand in her death but the aftermath)

[...of J.Temperance]

10. I do know

What a corpse is, ya know! I'm not THAT dim, surely?! :P

Why did Ferrell assist in the disposal of this woman's body? I mean, NORMAL people wouldn't agree to assisting in doing that sort of thing.

[uppityperson]

27. I copied that since you said "the POS had a hand in the woman's death" and maybe

missed that part. I don't know why she did what she did, do not know her, or him. Do you?

[truth2power]

29. As near as I can tell

from the article, it appears she pled guilty to obstructing justice and complicity to gross abuse of a corpse in the case of "the slaying of a pregnant woman,..."

Sounds like she didn't commit the murder. I'm not trying to excuse her. IANAL, but just trying to clarify what seem to be the legal issues, here.

[Quantess]

15. and guilty of "gross abuse of a corpse".

She did more than just help drag the body away. I wonder what kind of "gross abuse" went on? (I've watched too many episodes of Dexter.)

This woman must have been under Cutt's spell, for her to help him so much with his heinous crime.

[uppityperson]

22. Legalize, it could be that simple

Dragged her away, helped load her into a car, buried her, etc.

[...of J.Temperance]

24. Why does she have had to have been "under Cutt's spell"

For her to have helped him like this?

Maybe she's just as wicked and black-hearted as he is....maybe SHE's a psychopath too....just because she's a woman doesn't mean she HAS to have been under Cutt's spell to help him with this heinous crime.

[Quantess]

31. AFAIK, there is no reason to think she was involved with the murder itself,

or that she had knowledge that it was going to happen.

It sounds to me that Cutts had to get rid of the body, and this other woman helped him. Then she blocked investigation and lied to police. It seems obvious to me that she had no other motive than to protect Cutts. She idolized him and would do anything for him, apparently.

[varkam]

4. Just because someone behaves like an animal...

doesn't give anyone the right to treat them as such. Ferrell and Cutts are both still human beings, regardless of the crimes that they have committed. That's not to say that they should not be punished, but rather that the punishment must be delivered in a humane fashion and they be allowed their full due process rights. When you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes back.

Moreover, it appears that Ferrell took a plea agreement and is agreeing to testify against Cutts in the slaying. That being the case, it seems that Cutts is the one that the prosecutors are gunning for and (presumably) is the one most involved in the slaying. Like it or not, these sorts of plea agreements where one party pleads for a lesser sentence in return for offering testimony against their conspirators is commonplace in the criminal justice system, as this helps the prosecution satisfy the burden of proof placed on them in criminal cases. Otherwise, they might not have the evidence to convict either.

[...of J.Temperance]

6. To be honest

I don't care, I'm 100% pro-Death Penalty and I'm hardcore on this issue....nothing will EVER make me water down my belief in those who commit the most heinous crimes should be subjected to the ULTIMATE punishment....that of denying THEM their life.

IF the anti-Death Penalty crowd would have had their way, in all probability Ted Bundy and John Gacy would have been paroled by now....because they NEVER would have been executed in the first place, because "they're human beings too", "they're victims too"....which I totally disagree on BOTH points.

Regardless of the plea bargin thing, Ferrell SHOULD be getting like 25 years with NO parole, and not 2 years and she's out in 1 year.

Where's the innocent victim, the pregnant woman going to be in a year....that's right, she's still going to be rotting in the cold ground and turning to dust.

What about the victims family, they have to face life everyday, without their loved one and the further added kick in the teeth, is that the POS who HELPED put their loved one in the cold ground, she gets to walk the earth again in a year.

To me, that's not justice.

I'm fully prepared to agree to disagree on this issue, I know that the anti-Death Penalty crowd are as hardcore anti-Death Penalty as I'm hardcore pro-Death Penalty.


On Edit: Added comment

[uppityperson]

9. She helped dispose of the body and lied to the police. Still get Death Penalty?

She did not kill her, but helped dispose of the body and lied to the police. Should she still get the Death Penalty in your opinion?

[...of J.Temperance]

14. My personal opinion is

Yes she should, helping to dispose of a murdered person's body and then lying to police to help cover the whole grotesque act up, she's an accomplice....she should be given the Death Penalty, she has as much blood on her hands as the actual murderer does.

Then again, I would like the Death Penalty expanded to include pedophiles and multiple rapists REGARDLESS of whether they've murdered anyone or not....especially pedophiles, they even TOUCH a child, the first time they get caught, they should be executed.

[varkam]

20. Given that the majority of people who commit child abuse...

are people known to the child, and the majority of those are the victim's family members are you sure you want to be executing for the first offense?

[...of J.Temperance]

23. Yes I'm sure.... child abuse and/or pedophilia first offence

Can I ask you why you asked that question, if that's okay?

If it's not okay my asking, then that's okay as well.

[varkam]

33. If you're insinuation is that I've molested children...

because I have the audacity to question the wisdom of executing people for first-time offenses, then that strikes me as a fairly repugnant ad hominem attack rather than addressing the substance of what I posted.

Not that it is any of your business at all why I questioned the virtue of your own apparent blood-lust, but I know one individual who was falsely convicted of molesting his children and another who did molest his daughter several years ago but the two have since reconciled (and executing either of these individuals would be against the wishes of the victims). Those are just two people I know personally. I'm sure there are many other such cases.

If insinuation is your intention, however, then it strikes me that you are not really interested in discussing this issue but rather simply berating those who disagree with you.

ETA: Also, the available data from Justice suggests that recidivism is rather low among sex offenders; ranging from 11-18% over five years depending on which study you look at. That number drops even further if a treatment program is completed. Not that that is going to have any effect on you, unfortunately.

[...of J.Temperance]

35. Gosh

You so misinterpreted my comment/question.

And I'm sorry that you did, I asked it for NONE of the reasons that you think I did....I'm not in the habit of "attacking" people nor "berating" those who disagree with me, nor am I in the habit of "insinuating" things.

I asked my question just out of interest, really because I thought YOU might be somehow suggesting that a parent and/or parents shouldn't be executed for child abuse and/or pedophilia.

I apologize for the misunderstanding, and hope that you can accept my apology and at the least recognize that I am BIG enough TO apologize.


On Edit: Check your PMs, if you would, just so you know.

[varkam]

38. I apologize for misinterpreting your comments.

These issues can be heated, and I can assure you that I have misinterpreted people before - so I apologize.

And I am opposed to people being executed, period. I think it is an especially bad idea in the case of child molestation for the reasons above. Here's some more reasons to consider:

With things like the sex offender registry becoming more and more punitive, prosecutors are having a tougher time getting guilty pleas out of those charged with crimes. In some cases, a guilty plea is not necessary in cases where there is enough evidence. If you make the death penalty mandatory for the first offense, I can assure you that there will be no more guilty pleas. Also, making the DP mandatory is going to push the problem underground given that a sizable proportion of the offenders are family members. It would be more likely that a wife or another family member would keep the problem under the rug if they knew that their family member would be executed if it were reported to the authorities. Also, in cases where of strange/acquaintance abuse, you're going to wind up with more dead kids on your hands because why would they risk having the child testify against them if they get caught? If they just molest the child and get caught, they get executed. If they molest and kill the child, they get executed. Either way, the result is the same, so making DP mandatory for first time offenders (even offenders who are judged to be unlikely for re-offense) is likely to just add an incentive for the perpetrator to murder their victim.

[MoonRiver]

11. The problem with the death penalty, imho, is the risk of executing an innocent person.

If we always knew, with 100% accuracy, that those convicted of heinous crimes really committed them, then, yes, I'd also be in favor of the death penalty. In fact, I was until I started reading about all those released from prison because DNA exonerated them.

[...of J.Temperance]

16. There's no excuse nowadays

Because of DNA, there's no excuse of "oh but innocent people have been executed"....not NOW, because of DNA evidence.

I'd even go as far to allow a FREE second DNA test, if there was too much hullaballoo, and if the second DNA test matched the first....no excuse not to execute them.

[varkam]

19. Of course, the problem there is

not all cases involve DNA evidence. There are people sitting on death-row this very minute who were put there on the basis of circumstantial evidence and eyewitness testimony (both of which can be incredibly flawed).

[Matariki]

37. DNA testing has also resulted in wrongful sentences.

Largely because of shoddy lab practices.


http://www.scientific.org/DNAProblems/DNA-Problems.htm

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/27/60II/main555723.shtml

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/183007_crimelab22.html

[The Straight Story]

12. I think you misunderstand (I have followed this case since it began)

The lady here did not kill the person or have any role in killing her. "In the slaying of" is in reference to the main crime which is to come to trial.

[...of J.Temperance]

18. That she

Assisted in the disposal of the woman's corpse and lied about everything to help cover it up, she has as much blood on her hands as her accomplice....she's just as guilty as he is.

But because the law is so upside down, she's going to walk in a year....the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

[lukasahero]

32. "as her accomplice"

Um, actually, SHE's the accomplice, HE's the murderer.

[Richard Steele]

34. I think you misunderstand- this poster DOESN'T CARE what she did, he wants her executed.

He's made that very clear.

[WildClarySage]

13. Gotta disagree with this:

'IF the anti-Death Penalty crowd would have had their way, in all probability Ted Bundy and John Gacy would have been paroled by now....because they NEVER would have been executed in the first place, because "they're human beings too", "they're victims too"....which I totally disagree on BOTH points.'

since nobody who believes in abolishing the death penalty that I know believes that TB and JG should have been sentenced to anything other than life with no possibility of parole.

The death penalty in the OP would be a huge injustice. 2yrs (and just because the possibility of parole exists does not mean that she'd get out in one) is not, IMHO, justice served... unless there are circumstances of which I'm unaware, which there may well be. I'm ok with assuming the judge in the case knows the facts of the case better than I do.

[...of J.Temperance]

21. So you think and/or your friends think it'd be okay

That decent, law-abiding citizens should have had their taxes WASTED on keeping fuckheads like Ted Bundy and John Gacy in jail for the rest of their lives?

I'm glad we can agree that 2 years for this woman ISN'T justice being served.

[varkam]

17. A response.

I don't care, I'm 100% pro-Death Penalty and I'm hardcore on this issue....nothing will EVER make me water down my belief in those who commit the most heinous crimes should be subjected to the ULTIMATE punishment....that of denying THEM their life.

I guess I subscribe to the thought that putting people to death only makes us murderers. Essentially all other civilized countries have abolished the death penalty as they regard it as barbaric. Hell, the "Chessboard Killer" in Russia (who was convicted on 48 counts of murder, suspected of many more, and gloated at his sentencing) was given a life sentence. Russia.

I also subscribe to the thought that human rights are non-negotiable and cannot be bargained away or discarded. If life is of value, then all life is of value - not just lives of those we like, admire, and respect.

IF the anti-Death Penalty crowd would have had their way, in all probability Ted Bundy and John Gacy would have been paroled by now....because they NEVER would have been executed in the first place, because "they're human beings too", "they're victims too"....which I totally disagree on BOTH points.

There is such a thing as life without parole. Of the several rationales for lifetime incarceration, I would imagine that Bundy and Gacy would've been excellent candidates under the guise of retribution and incapacitation.

Regardless of the plea bargin thing, Ferrell SHOULD be getting like 25 years with NO parole, and not 2 years and she's out in 1 year.

I find it interesting that you know what should happen in this case, seeing as how you don't know the details of this case. Neither do I, but I am not advocating a specific sentence. Perhaps Cutts coerced her into helping him. Perhaps she did not know what she was getting in to. Also, take careful note of the word bargain. In other words, there's got to be something in it for the accused to plead guilty - otherwise they have no motivation to assist the prosecution.

Where's the innocent victim, the pregnant woman going to be in a year....that's right, she's still going to be rotting in the cold ground and turning to dust.

What about the victims family, they have to face life everyday, without their loved one and the further added kick in the teeth, is that the POS who HELPED put their loved one in the cold ground, she gets to walk the earth again in a year.

There's a reason why our criminal justice system does not allow victims to decide the punishment of the condemned. That's because they are, by-and-large, unable to maintain a sense of objectivity and proportion because of the very heavy emotional toll that events have taken on them. I'm not saying that those feelings are invalid, or that we should not be angry, outraged, and sickened by these sorts of things. We should. But that does still not allow us to do as we please. Whether or not these people are executed, the victim is still going to be in the ground. Nothing can take that back, and nothing can undo it.

[...of J.Temperance]

26. Heck

I have to meet a dental appointment, I've bookmarked this though, it's too long for me to respond to in such a short space of time....so I'll get back to it in a few hours.

[mvd]

25. Yep, I'm just as hard-core anti-DP

I will never support the sentence. It just goes against all I stand for in allowing more killing. But there's room for disagreement here. I don't even get myself choked up over some executions.

[...of J.Temperance]

28. "But there's room for disagreement here"

Is how I see it too....I mean, people know I'm pro-Death Penalty....I'm sure it was illustrated the most at DU during the run-up to Tookie Williams' execution, when we had like....what seemed 15 threads a day every day for like four days or something, most OPs were from anti-Death Penalty people....and I responded to most of those threads about how hardcore pro-Death Penalty I am....and of course I fully supported the execution of Tookie Williams.

I do respect the anti-Death Penalty crowds right to be anti-Death Penalty, I just disagree with them is all....I like that we can discuss the whole issue though politely, and not have a lot of screeching at each other and whatnot.

Now....the dentists chair is a-calling.

[High Plains]

30. Good thing you're not a judge...

...just some intemperate internet ranter.

[...of J.Temperance]

36. I don't "rant"....just because you disagree with my point of view DOESN'T make MY point of view

"Ranting"