Bentler files arguments with Iowa Supreme Court

" The death penalty is a wasteful tool because appeals eat up volumes of time and money that far exceeds the cost of lifetime imprisonment. Further, Ms. Thomas, you appear to think the procedure in the court is a barrier to justice, one that should be removed - a very disturbing attitude. Process ensures that all evidence if located and reviewed, that an judge does not arbitrarily abuse defendants (or litigants in the civil system), and that the police are kept in check. To restate what I have said before, without process being properly observed, the system lacks integrity. If the system lacks integrity, people cannot have faith in the system - meaning that justice cannot be served because there is no fair trial. I firmly believe that people who wish to abandon the whole system, such as Ms. Thomas, are those who have never faced the criminal justice system or fail to understand or to contemplate what life is like under socialist/fascist/communist nations. The Founders of this nation would recoil in horror at those who wish to railroad the accused through the justice system. "

" I agree with "WS" ! Shawn has been served his justice! It really doesn't matter with the socks or not. This is just another way, scum of the earth can appeal to their sentences and make everyone pay more out of their pockets. Yes, all of you have to pay for Shawn's appeals, like it or not. You also pay for his lifetime stay in prison. Iowa needs to bring the death penalty back, and save all of us taxpayer's expenses! I feel terribly sorry for the Mendez and Bentler families. They are the ones who have suffered from this ordeal! The only way Shawn gets out of prison, is when he is dead! Actually, he is better off dead anyway. Who would want to spend their entire life in prison when your entire family is dead from your own hands? I know he has daughters, but what kind of a life is that? They won't really know their Father, and they will NEVER get to know their Grandparents and Aunts! "

" In or out of prison - this guy's life is over. Obviously I hope it's "in" - but we can't go throwing the Constitution out the window. Otherwise we're all in trouble.

Like I said - in or out of prison, this guy is done. "

" Rest assured, someone will be juged for these crimes by the all powerful creator, unless of course he/she repents of their sin....earthly things will come and pass but eternity is forever.... "

" Quick clarification of a typo: lawyers are ethically forbidden from representing a client to the court as being innocent when the lawyers know for sure that the client is, in fact, guilty. Contrary to popular belief, lawyers do not just assert a client's pure innocence when the lawyer is fully aware of guilt; to claim otherwise reflects total ignorance of the profession and the ethical dedication the vast majority of lawyers exhibit. "

" There are lots of opinions on this blog, and lots of "it should be this way because we all know he's guilty". Mr. Knowledgeable is correct. Your opinion does not matter. The Justice System doesn't look at opinion; it looks at fact and fact only. The fact may be that the "socks" were not legal to admit in this trial because they were not legally obtained. And if they were not legally obtained they must be tossed. I believe 100% he is guilty. He is an American though and as Americans (bad people or good people) we have rights. By making sure things were done legally by investigators/police, etc we are protecting all American rights. If you don't understand that you should not be an American....We don't always like the outcome but we certainly must follow the rules when it comes to the Legal System....Justice will prevail in this case. Instead of beating up the defense attorney beat up the idiots who chose to take evidence without a warrant or the people working at the jail who allowed it to be taken. When cases like this fall through it is always the police, investigators, prosecutors who messed up....maybe they should be more careful and follow the law. "

" First, I don't appreciate the sarcastic insult (RE: Mr. Oh-so-knowledgeable) - quite inappropriate as ad hominem attacks (which yours most certainly is) are logical fallicies. Thus, you assertion of logicl is at least questionable, if not toally invalid. If you followed the case, as you claim, can you answer whether the witness was night-blind and the defendant was not? These arguments are far from specious, so tread carefully with your claims. Does Not Matter makes a good point as what s/he refers to is, under evidence law, is called "hearsay" - hearsay is not admissible in a court of law. Therefore, Ms. Bentler's comments are likely hearsay, inadmissible, and your argument fails.

I also find your clearly inaccurate and totally inappropriate comment on Public Defenders a direct insult to the profession of law and the rule of law. No public defender aims "to try to get people off that even they must know are guilty as sin." For shame. For shame. Case in point, this public defender is trying to ensure that the law is followed. If the cops followed the rules, challenges like the one in this case would not be necessary. I'm really at a loss for words when people such as yourself attacks a public defender for ensuring that the law is followed. Further, lawyers are, for all intents and purposes, barred from representing a client as being when innocent when that client is certainly guilty. Are you implying that public defenders are liars? It surely appears that way. "

" Someone said his sister was his eyewitness. Well I think I also read that she was found in the closet. Now to me that sounds like she did not actually see him. She heard her mother saying Shawn no. She automatically assumes it is her brother. There is 4 very popular teens in the home with many friends and alot of people know them. Heck maybe a " Shawn" owed dad some money. I have not heard if there was any investigation to any of those avenues. I am not saying Mr. Bentler is not guilty, just going down less traveled avenues. You all know how our justice system is. We all have been scre*** over when we know better, but what ever makes life easier for them is what we are dealt with. "

" I was just drawing a logical conclusion, Mr. Oh-So-Knowledgeable. I followed the case. Bentler's lawyer claimed that it was too dark for Bentler to be identified by his sister, trying to explain away that eye-witness 911 call. (How did *the lawyer* know that it was too dark, btw?) And yet the gunman was able to track her down in the closet and put a bullet specifically through her head. Either it was "too dark" or it wasn't. And if it wasn't, there can be absolutely no doubt that she recognized her brother as her murderer.

Frankly, I feel sorry for public defenders who have to try to get people off that even they must know are guilty as sin. It's a job I sure wouldn't want to do. "

" I love those of you who are so eager to just waive away criminal defendant rights. The Founders would weep at such weak thinking. Every defendant has a right to counsel and that counsel has an ethical obligation to the profession of law and the client to make every reasonable argument available for the defendant. That is what the public defender is doing in this case, which is as it should be and has been for a very, very long time. She is not "out of her damn mind," she is doing her job as required by her profession and her client.

VBrown, how do you know it was too dark in that house? Were you there? If so, why didn't you testify? Are you withholding evidence? Hmmm....rather bold to make a claim like you do absent personal knowledge of the evidence or an intense study of the Bentler case.

Additionally, assumptions are just that, assumptions - there is no proof in an assumption. You can confirm my claim via the dictionary. Therefore, Ms. Bentler's assumptions are irrelevant and so are yours in a criminal case. What matters in a case are facts.

So far as the socks, I'll tell you who gives a crap about the socks - the Constitution, the law of evidence, readers of American history, true patriots, and any other American who rightly respects the rule of law. I should really stop reading these comments because, frankly, they are anti-american by implying that asserting one's constitutional rights is some kind of sham or fraud - the Founders drafted the Constitution for a reason and it was not to give cops free reign over the citizenry. Mr. Bentler is entitled to assert a Constitutional right, period, regardless of his actual guilt. Due Process, the 4th Amendment, and the 5th Amendment matter. I'm sure that if any of you were arrested, you'd howl the same way and demand your right, innocent or not, which is how the process is supposed to work.

The socks DO matter if they were illegally obtained by the police. Contrary to what appears to be most readers opinions, the cops have rules to follow and they are clear ones. Violation of the rules = the evidence is tossed. Plain, simple, and clear. Just as we have clear rules to follow as civilians (i.e. don't hit people and if you do you will get arrested), the cops do as well. Please, for the love of GOD, educate yourselves on these things because it is yoru duty as a good citizen to really understand them.

RE: Lea - it almost sounds like you want Mr. Bentler to harm the Public Defender if his claim succeeds, as if she deserves injury for doing her job. That is incredibly scary and makes me as fearful of you and I would be of Mr. Bentler.

I have no doubt Mr. Bentler is guilty, but in order for his sentence and case to be Constitutionally valid, the rules must be followed. I'd also like to point out that ragging on a public defender is rather petty. I doubt many of you who post on this site could afford a truly good defense lawyer and so would end up as clients of the public defender were you to get arrested and charged - those folks work hard to uphold the rule of law for clients who can't read, have mental illnesses, and other issues. Please give them some respect. "

" Shawn is never going to get out of prison. He can try all he wants, but I think Dan Ramsey is the only guy that gets to stay out of jail by appealing his case 100 times. Shawn Bentler brutally murdered his entire family! He is lucky he gets to serve life sentences and not get the needle!! Man up to what you did!! He is a heartless monster and nothing will change that. If the defense attourney really wants the socks thrown out she is out of her damn mind. A jury is going to find him guilty with or without the socks! "

" The public defender is going to sleep really good at night if this guy gets off. Does she wonder if he might come pay her a visit? It isnt hard to find someone nowadays. What a bellyrubber. If he can murder his own family, he can do anything. We have enough scarey people out on the streets, lets not turn another one loose. The family deserves justice. "

" I have been disgusted from the beginning that this guy would even *try* to say he isn't guilty. His sister's 911 call was firsthand, eyewitness testimony that he was there and that he did it. The defense's arguments that it was too dark for her to tell...pure bull! Why would she assume that a dangerous intruder was her brother unless her brother had already given the family reason to think he might do something like that? And it wasn't too dark for him to see where to shoot her in the head! This sock thing is just grasping at straws, like he has been from the beginning--suffering some kind of delusion that the evidence against him isn't absolutely damning. "

" Wasn't the family's rights violated when he shot them? Who gives a crap about his socks. They had all the evidence they needed. I just think that Bentler can't handle what he is getting in prison and is looking for a way out. Good luck, you will still go back. "

" SOCKS??? Isn't that a stragety that was used in the OJ Simpson case? "

" I hope that this case does not get over turned. What this boy did to his family is horrible. "