Page 1 of 1
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:56 pm
I am wondering about the usage of the adjective, Eligible, in some of the latest news articles on the Moussaoui case. I am struggling with the following sentence” Jury Finds Moussaoui Eligible for Death Penalty.” It is not like he has applied for the death penalty and was successful. I understand that the persecution applies for the sentence that they want, but how would he become eligible if he himself does not apply to determine eligibility? Maybe it is just in the way this sentence is written, that is difficult for me to understand why the adjective, eligible, is being used. Maybe in this context the usage is okay, but I still find it a bit confusing.
4th of April,2006
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 8:03 pm
It means that he is not considered to be disqualified from the possibility of receving the death sentence by virtue of insanity or the failure of the prosecution (not 'persecution') to demonstrate his culpability in contributing to the deaths of the victims of 9/11. He is also described as merely being 'eligible' because at the time of writing, there are still some additional procedural hurdles that must be surmounted for a judge to be able to actually pronounce the death sentence.
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 8:33 pm
It is the same usage as :
- on his 6oth birthday he became eligable for an elderly person's bus pass,
- the chief fundraisers will be eligable to receive 3 free tickets to the dinner.
In these cases it is that you are in circumstances where you can receive these but won't necessarily use them.