A third possibility (and the one I had assumed he was claiming) is that he was indeed innocent of the murders, but that his past had been all messed up and that he was far from innocent of other things he wasn't charged with. That would make sense of his claims of innocence (of the charges) and redemption (from the other garbage in his life).

That said, I agree that it sounds as if the conviction was correct.

Jessie Jackson comparing the Governor to Pontius Pilate? Following that scene we would find that "Tookie" represents Barabbas. In that wonderful scene we find the people wanted the vile over the one who was innocent.

Since we are drawing Biblical illustrations. What has changed over the past 2,000 years? Not much except that the names have changed. People are still willing to choose the vilest person over the innocent.

"It is not good to be partial to the wicked or to deprive the innocent of justice. Prov. 18:5"

Even Paul (and Jessie should know this) was not afraid to die if he did something deserving death. Yet "Tookie" wanted it both ways on the issue so he could manipulate the people and his situation. Michelle Malkin's "The Tookie Files" got it right when she quoted an excerpt from the LA Times:

"Tookie wanted to have it both ways — he wanted to maintain his actual innocence claim so that he would have something to argue in the courts, but he still wanted to claim that he had been redeemed," Levenson said. "In the end, he lost on both fronts."

Unlike Pilate who 'washed his hands' and was unwilling to release Jesus even though he believed he was innocent, Arnold wasn't a girlie man and stuck to his belief (based on the evidence) that 'Tookie' was deserving to die. I agree with Outside the Beltway that he is responsible for many crimes as the founder of the Crips. If he and other leaders (such as Jessie) would spend have their energy speaking out against the crime within their own culture then we would have less concerns about 'discriminatory' death penalty cases. And we might see less people like Wolf Blitzer defending such men. Though cited for his anti-gang work in prison you still have to wonder why he never apologized for the four brutal murders. Nice example for fellow gang-bangers following his steps

There were actually 5 victims. At $30,929/year to house an inmate in California. It cost $804,165 to support "Tookie" while he appealed his conviction.

First of all Stanley WAS INNOCENT! Geronimo Pratt sat in a prison for 27 years for the murder of a white woman & attempted murder of her husband that he did not commit. But according to the LAW and the MEDIA they had all this OVERWHELMING evidence against him! PLEASE!!! The truth was: EVERYONE, the police, the witnesses, the jailhouse informants, the prosecution, EVERYONE OF THEM LIED. People were saying he should spend the rest of his life in prison - if the death penalty were in law at the time of his sentencing he would be a INNOCENT dead man just like "TOOKIE". You should not believe everything you see/hear on the news. The powers that be can make Mother Theresa look guilty! You cannot make one man responsible for the murders committed by others. Do your research! There have been thousands of gangs in this country. Gangs didn't start with Tookie, Crips aren't the only gangs and weren't the first gang. Gang's have been in the city of Los Angeles since the 1940's. Our government is the No. 1 gang in this Country! Responsible for hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of killings! Anyone who opposes the death penalty will tell you that they'd feel the same way regardless of the race of the victims or the accused involved. I doubly oppose the death penalty because its biased, unfair and racist! With Black men given death at a higher rate than others. There have been over two dozen executions where the defendant was innocent, or more than likely innocent of the crimes they were convicted of. There have been close to 200 inmates released from death row in recent history because of DNA and new evidence of their innocense. Jeffrey Dahmer, who ate black people was as sick as they come, I wouldn't have wanted him executed. Especially if not having the death penalty will keep a innocent black man who has been framed by the police from getting a sentence of Death by the State! Do your research - regarding the death penalty. Find out for yourself how racist, crooked, evil and biased it is. Tookie is guilty of not being a snitch and it cost him his life. The police even said he wouldn't cooperate with the investigation - READ BETWEEN THE LINES. An innocent man was legally murdered in the early morning hours of Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - because the media kept showing the face of a very white, very young, Albert Owens, in his military uniform - Read Between the Lines. Mr. Owen's widow Linda Owens, by the way - supported Tookie. But you never saw/heard that on any news channel! Again, Read Between the Lines! All you saw was the step-mother whose for the death penalty. What about the other victims - the Yangs? Their photos were never shown! I guess they didn't matter as much. But if they were white - they'd be the poster family for the death penalty! I feel for every murdered victim in this tragedy and their families. I feel for the real killer, who has to live with the fact that an innocent man was murdered for crimes he/she is responsible for. Read all the facts pros and cons before commenting. Those who aren't familiar with the case, shouldn't comment at all. Another tid bit of info - Tookie didn't make a profit from his book sales, all proceeds if any (the books didn't sell very well) went to programs for at risk youth. A lot of you are obviously easily influenced by lies!

To those who don't believe an innocent person can be sentenced to death row and legally murdered - should search your browser for: "Innocent Man Executed in Texas" by Lise Olsen

In Tookie's case its the same story - different man!

TO THOSE OF YOU WHO SAY HE SHOULD HAVE APOLOGIZED IF HE WAS IN FACT REDEEMED - YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE VALOR OF A REAL BLACK MAN! THE MAN SAID HE WAS INNOCENT! WEREN'T YOU LISTENING? TELL ME WHY SHOULD HE HAVE APOLOGIZED? SO HIS LIFE COULD BE SPARED AND YOU ALL COULD SAY WE TOLD YOU SO! I DON'T THINK SO. A SISSY WOULD HAVE ADMITTED TO SOMETHING HE DIDN'T DO IF HE THOUGHT IT WOULD SAVE HIS LIFE - BUT I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HAVE SAVED HIS LIFE - SCHWARZENEGGAR DID WHAT HE WAS EXPECTED TO DO. HE USED TOOKIE'S NON-APOLOGY AS AN EXCUSE TO HAVE HIM MURDERED. HE KNEW TOOKIE WOULDN'T APOLOGIZE FOR SOMETHING HE DID NOT DO!

You can't strip Schwarzenegger of his Austrian citizenship; part of the oath of citizenship includes renouncing all prior alliegences.

(In practice, I think they aren't too picky... if Austria says that Schwarzenegger is still an Austrian, nobody complains... but I bet the Governator himself only says that he's an American.)