What is wrong with some people..19 hour rape..

Latchy

davyjose wrote: »

Them bloody do-gooders with their damn justice and equality. Really boils my blood.....

Justice and equality are one thing and ok in general but as you see most of the posts are of the opinion that they guy should be fried .Well, if that is to inhuman for some ,then as i suggested early on the least the victim and i repeat ' the least ' the victim can expect is for the guy to be locked up forever until the day of his natural death , after he has being found guilty of course

ejmaztec

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Why is that? Do they perform automatic evaluations on all persons in prison? It's a pretty big assumption on your part that he has had one, and even if he did have someone look at him, it's unlikely that he had anything more than a cursory check-up to make sure that he isn't trying to kill himself.

When all of the post-trial sordid family history of this individual is placed in the public domain, I'm certain that someone will be criticised for failing in their duty somewhere along the line. A person capable of inflicting such relentless cruelty on another person, must have rung some alarm bells somewhere in the system.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Whatever way you spin it, there is no point in saying what should have happened, it's too late for that. Focus more on what should be done to prevent similar offences in the future.

One has to point out what should have happened, as surely this answers the question as to how similar offences can be prevented in the future.

johnnyskeleton

latchyco wrote: »

The do gooders will make sure his human rights come first whatever .

Are you suggesting that insisting that there is a fair trial is somehow unfair to the victim?

No, let's not let mere technicalities like finding the truth in the best way possible, that's what the commie-hippie-nazis do, lets just assume that everything said by the prosecutor, and the NY times, is true.

Latchy

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Are you suggesting that insisting that there is a fair trial is somehow unfair to the victim?

No, let's not let mere technicalities like finding the truth in the best way possible, that's what the commie-hippie-nazis do, lets just assume that everything said by the prosecutor, and the NY times, is true.

No i think you misunderstood if your read my posts you will see i said that upon being found guilty the criminal in this case should at least be incarcerated for the rest of his life unless he is to be executed .It wont be the victim who decides his punishment will it ? ,it never is and it's up to a jury to decide .I was pointing out that if found guilty of all these horrific charges ,then at least the victim can expect life for the criminal to be just that , life as in die in jail .

johnnyskeleton

ejmaztec wrote: »

When all of the post-trial sordid family history of this individual is placed in the public domain, I'm certain that someone will be criticised for failing in their duty somewhere along the line. A person capable of inflicting such relentless cruelty on another person, must have rung some alarm bells somewhere in the system.

How can you be sure? If anything it would make more sense that he didn't set off any alarm bells otherwise someone might have tried to help him. But above all, we just don't know.

One has to point out what should have happened, as surely this answers the question as to how similar offences can be prevented in the future.

I don't think that follows because we can look at this person and say he committed a number of offences as a child therefore we should have known he was a bad apple, because there are no doubt many more who had similar childhoods who did not turn out the same way. So the most obvious way of preventing this offence (if proved true) seen with the benefit of hindsight, is to imprison him for life as a preventative measure, which is not the best way of dealing with people going into the future.

johnnyskeleton

latchyco wrote: »

No i think you misunderstood if your read my posts you will see i said that upon being found guilty the criminal in this case should at least be incarcerated for the rest of his life unless he is to be executed .It wont be the victim who decides his punishment will it ? ,it never is and it's up to a jury to decide .I was pointing out that if found guilty of all these horrific charges ,then at least the victim can expect life for the criminal to be just that , life as in die in jail .

I have read it again, and it seems to me that in response to my post advising that punishments should not be discussed until he is found guilty( as to do otherwise is in breach of the sub judice rule, although I doubt a NY jury would be reading boards):

How about a fair trial for starters? If he is convicted you can then set about discussing punishment.

You said:

The do gooders will make sure his human rights come first whatever .

That sounds to me like you are suggesting that putting a fair trial before doleing out the cruel and unusual punishments called for on this thread is somehow a leftie-hippie type of attitude and something to be derided. The right to a fair trial is the cornerstone of our justice system, and much more important than victims rights.

davyjose

latchyco wrote: »

Justice and equality are ... ok in general

Unless its across the board, then it's not justice, or equality.

gogglebok

latchyco wrote: »

The do gooders will make sure his human rights come first whatever .

I'm with johnnyskeleton here. It sounds as if you are muddling two different people. The "his" whose human rights should be protected, the guy who deserves a fair trial from an impartial justice system, is the defendant. The "his" who people want to punish is the criminal.

They may not be the same person.

Apologies if I'm wrong. If you are acknowledging that distinction, and suggesting that there are people who put the human rights of violent rapists before those of their victims, it sounds like an astonishing claim. Can you provide examples?

JangoFett

Times like this I lose faith in humanity. I really do.

This guy deserves to die, to be killed. Death is too good almost, he should be tortured.

FX Meister

**** buzz

StonedParadoX

chin up bronte theres alot worse crap out there then what this woman got
shes lucky


im all fairness.. what use is it killing him ? Has he learned anything ? i doubt it
killing him means HE Wins

you need something that affects him and only him psychological somehow?

give him a load of Acid and DXM and make him have the worst trip but constantly ****ing with him and constantly feeding him different drugs
his brain would eventually melt and end up catatonic

mind u he could enjoy all that

ejmaztec

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

How can you be sure? If anything it would make more sense that he didn't set off any alarm bells otherwise someone might have tried to help him. But above all, we just don't know.

We know now, here’s a report from another New York publication:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04202007/news/regionalnews/19_hr___rape__fiend_regionalnews_erika_martinez__murray_weiss_and_tatiana_deligiannakis.htm

"Williams was sent by the state Department of Corrections to a mental-health facility for three months between November 1999 and February 2000 after shooting someone in Manhattan, records show."

I think that they have psychiatrists and psychologists in mental-health facilities.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I don't think that follows because we can look at this person and say he committed a number of offences as a child therefore we should have known he was a bad apple, because there are no doubt many more who had similar childhoods who did not turn out the same way. So the most obvious way of preventing this offence (if proved true) seen with the benefit of hindsight, is to imprison him for life as a preventative measure, which is not the best way of dealing with people going into the future.

That reply has got nothing to do with the flawless logic of my comment, which was:

"One has to point out what should have happened, as surely this answers the question as to how similar offences can be prevented in the future."

We’re obviously both on a completely different wavelength.

Latchy

gogglebok wrote: »

I'm with johnnyskeleton here. It sounds as if you are muddling two different people. The "his" whose human rights should be protected, the guy who deserves a fair trial from an impartial justice system, is the defendant. The "his" who people want to punish is the criminal.

They may not be the same person.

Apologies if I'm wrong. If you are acknowledging that distinction, and suggesting that there are people who put the human rights of violent rapists before those of their victims, it sounds like an astonishing claim. Can you provide examples?

There are lawyers paid who make fortunes to get serious offenders a lighter sentence with chance for parole .I sure you have heard about them .

The gut reaction for most of us when we hear and read the details of horrific crimes such as this is to want to have the offender slowly tortured beofre being slung in some hole and it's a perfectly human reaction but sombody was continuely reminding me in another thread that ' jail doesnt work ' and dragged out all sorts of statistics to prove same .So as i was coming across as one of the flog em and hang em brigade without humanity in that thread, i suggested that in horrific crimes such as this ,the right to appeal for shorter sentence or even release should be void .

I just get sick of hearing on the news again of another sensless murder were the offender rights seem more important than the victims right to justice. I am talking about rapists, muderers,drunk drivers ,drug dealers to numerous to mention .Now it's a double sided coin cuz on the one hand the right of defendent to have a fair trial is paramount ,but once found guilty i want him to be severly punished without to much good will be thrown his way ,and that seems to be the crux of the matter .

truecrippler

Fooooking hell. Thats some sick sh!t right there. Torture the bastid!!!

gogglebok

latchyco wrote: »

I just get sick of hearing on the news again of another sensless murder were the offender rights seem more important than the victims right to justice. I am talking about rapists, muderers,drunk drivers ,drug dealers to numerous to mention .Now it's a double sided coin cuz on the one hand the right of defendent to have a fair trial is paramount ,but once found guilty i want him to be severly punished without to much good will be thrown his way ,and that seems to be the crux of the matter .

Yes, but where do you hear this? Where are all these people who think that the rights of convicted criminals are more important than the victim's right to justice? It just doesn't sound real to me. I have never heard a news broadcast where an offender's rights seemed more important than a victim's.

I have always assumed these rapist-lovers were a fervently imagined bogeyman, concocted by the kind of people who find it more comfortable to think in prefab categories like "do-gooder" and "bleeding heart liberal" than to look closely at the facts of whatever they are arguing. But I may be wrong on that, and I would welcome correction. I would certainly love a link to one of these news broadcasts.

latchyco wrote: »

There are lawyers paid who make fortunes to get serious offenders a lighter sentence with chance for parole .I sure you have heard about them .

Surely the purpose of a lawyer in these circumstances is to put the best case possible for the client, so that nobody who enters the justice system will be disadvantaged by not having a law degree. Isn't that fair? Shouldn't everyone have that right of access to legal expertise, and not just trained lawyers?

Bottle_of_Smoke

Should have kept Saddam alive just for input on how to punish this guy.

My heart goes out to the victim & also her family, imagine the rage & depression theyre going to feel.

Hopefully he hasnt done this kind of thing before, but I hope hes fully investigated.

johnnyskeleton

Kazobel wrote: »

Well yeah, an event like is going to traumatise her for life, if all he gets is a few years in a mental institute or 25 years in prison she'll always fear him coming back, imagine living with what he did and then added to that the fear that at some point he may have the opportunity to come back to finish the job. That's 25 years of always waiting for that day, he's in prison but his (like ever other) rape victim also becomes a prisoner. Death to them is the only way to free their victims IMO and fcuk his human rights, humans don't do what he did, hell I wouldn't even agree with PETA defending him because even animals wouldn't do that, he's not human, he's not animal he's a sub-species and there's no group for them so let the fcukers die, society is well rid IMO.

I suppose executing the offenders might or might not free her and help her get over it, but it probably wont. A much better way of helping victims deal with what has happend to them is to stop patronising them and forcing them into this role that you and everyone else who falsely claims to champion the rights of victims seem hell bent to have them in.

Don't treat them as political footballs to kick around to your own end, don't say the victims should be thinking this, or treated like this, don't belittle them so that you can express your frustration at your perception of crime.

I think anybody who really cases about the victims of crime would never make such comments as these - you want to get your point across and don't care whose life you crush to get it done.

johnnyskeleton

ejmaztec wrote: »

We know now, here’s a report from another New York publication:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04202007/news/regionalnews/19_hr___rape__fiend_regionalnews_erika_martinez__murray_weiss_and_tatiana_deligiannakis.htm

"Williams was sent by the state Department of Corrections to a mental-health facility for three months between November 1999 and February 2000 after shooting someone in Manhattan, records show."

I think that they have psychiatrists and psychologists in mental-health facilities.

Fine, but you had to dig this up to support your point, you had made assumptions in your earlier post.

That reply has got nothing to do with the flawless logic of my comment, which was:

"One has to point out what should have happened, as surely this answers the question as to how similar offences can be prevented in the future."

We’re obviously both on a completely different wavelength.

So what should have happened? You could argue that he should have been locked up in prison for life. If applied across the board, this means that an identicial situation would not happen again. However, it ignores the fact that you would have to lock people up on the off-chance that they would commit such serious offences in the future, so to look at this specific case, see what should have been done, and apply it generally is very faulty thinking.

johnnyskeleton

latchyco wrote: »

There are lawyers paid who make fortunes to get serious offenders a lighter sentence with chance for parole .I sure you have heard about them .

Who exactly pays them? The criminals? Or the grossly underfunded public defender system?

latchyco wrote: »

The gut reaction for most of us when we hear and read the details of horrific crimes such as this is to want to have the offender slowly tortured beofre being slung in some hole and it's a perfectly human reaction but sombody was continuely reminding me in another thread that ' jail doesnt work ' and dragged out all sorts of statistics to prove same .So as i was coming across as one of the flog em and hang em brigade without humanity in that thread, i suggested that in horrific crimes such as this ,the right to appeal for shorter sentence or even release should be void .

Look it's perfectly simple. An appeal is made on the basis that the original decision was wrong. It is not an appeal for clemency. So if there was a mistake in the sentence passed then it can be fixed on appeal. If there was not the appeal will fail. So the right to appeal is a good thing, it makes sure that the sentences are correct, and it doesn't cause any harm. Should we also ban the prosecution's right to appeal a lenient sentence (if such a right exists in America)?

latchyco wrote: »

I just get sick of hearing on the news again of another sensless murder were the offender rights seem more important than the victims right to justice.

Come on be honest, are you sick for yourself or the victim? You couldn't give a toss about the actual victim, you care about yourself, and that you feel snug in your bed at night, and you want to see bad men punished because that's how you express that deep inner turmoil. Why not just leave the victim out of it and say "I feel sick because I want to see people who commit these offences go to jail for longer". I would take no issue with that as it is a very rational and sensible thing to say. However, by pretending to champion the cause of victims you are:

1) ultimately keeping them in their role as victim,
2) using them for your own ends, and
3) making other victims feel inadequate where the sentence does not meet the expectations that you have given them.

I've said this several times on this thread and been ignored, that's fine. But if people would just stop pretending to care about the victims and said what they think themselves I would have no problem with people expressing these extreme views on punishment (I don't agree with corporal punishment or torture, but I am prepared to debate it rationally if other people are).

In any event, it's not the victim's right to justice, it's society's right to justice.

latchyco wrote: »

I am talking about rapists, muderers,drunk drivers ,drug dealers to numerous to mention .Now it's a double sided coin cuz on the one hand the right of defendent to have a fair trial is paramount ,but once found guilty i want him to be severly punished without to much good will be thrown his way ,and that seems to be the crux of the matter .

For serious offences in Ireland, America and the UK, massive sentences are handed out to rapists, murderers and drug dealers. However, it is only ever the lenient sentences that make the pages of the evening herald. If you read the Irish Times, or (shock horror) actually go into the courts, you will see heavy sentences being doled out on a regular basis. As for drunk drivers, what do you mean by severe punishment?

therewillbe

When he gets sent down , maybe some justice will be inflicted upon him .ie: NO LUBRICANT TIME. A sickf... rot in jail , sicko.

johnnyskeleton

gogglebok wrote: »

Yes, but where do you hear this? Where are all these people who think that the rights of convicted criminals are more important than the victim's right to justice? It just doesn't sound real to me. I have never heard a news broadcast where an offender's rights seemed more important than a victim's.

I have always assumed these rapist-lovers were a fervently imagined bogeyman, concocted by the kind of people who find it more comfortable to think in prefab categories like "do-gooder" and "bleeding heart liberal" than to look closely at the facts of whatever they are arguing. But I may be wrong on that, and I would welcome correction. I would certainly love a link to one of these news broadcasts.

Well said.

Lockstep

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Look it's perfectly simple. An appeal is made on the basis that the original decision was wrong. It is not an appeal for clemency. So if there was a mistake in the sentence passed then it can be fixed on appeal. If there was not the appeal will fail. So the right to appeal is a good thing, it makes sure that the sentences are correct, and it doesn't cause any harm. Should we also ban the prosecution's right to appeal a lenient sentence (if such a right exists in America)?

+1

Well put

cronndiesel

is this story true? its a bit OTT isnt it- still life is stranger then fiction

teaman35

thats horrible what happened, really made me sick.

Bring in live organ donation i say..
about the only good thing to come from that perpetrator would be spare parts.

cronndiesel

seems to be true! in the rooms of the house im staying they like to do a bit of s/m some have handcuffs whips etc these are ordinary everyday people eg girls who work with children (the walls are really thin so when they come home with lads i have to put on the stereo:rolleyes:) of course ya dare not say anything but.....

i wish they could read about that case:(

ejmaztec

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Fine, but you had to dig this up to support your point, you had made assumptions in your earlier post.

I made a point that was completely obvious to me, and this simply backed it up.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

So what should have happened? You could argue that he should have been locked up in prison for life. If applied across the board, this means that an identicial situation would not happen again. However, it ignores the fact that you would have to lock people up on the off-chance that they would commit such serious offences in the future, so to look at this specific case, see what should have been done, and apply it generally is very faulty thinking.

As I pointed out in my first post, the man slipped through the system. The mental-health system, in particular, was obviously ineffective in dealing with whatever issues he had. I’m not repeating myself again as I’ve already made my take on the situation clear – several times.:p

masseyno9

Just for all the 'hang him' brigade: "an eye for an eye will leave us all blind"

We don't need to lower ourselves (as a society) to his level. Punishment by jail-time or otherwise will no doubt be imposed on the perpretrator...bearing in mind Mr. Williams is only an accused at this point, no matter how likely/apparent it is that he committed the crime. The sentence will almost certainly be the maximum allowable under US law due to the nature of the case. I seriously doubt that whatever sentence, no matter how harsh/violent/sadistic/whatever anyone can come up with will be of any comfort to the victim.

The victim will need some serious help in order to even begin to recover, both physically and mentally. No matter what anyone sticks up his arse in prison, she will still wake from nightmares and flashbacks for the rest of her life. What good is it to punish him the way he did the girl?

Now I'm not a do-gooder or anything of the sort, I just think its all too easy (not to mention wrong) to just give him a taste of his own medicine.

metaoblivia

I think some people just get very frustrated that more can't be done.
It's true - no punishment can be handed down that will comfort the victim, or make what happened to her any less horrific, even the death penalty, which isn't on the cards in this case as no one was killed. Trials like this aren't about revenge - they are about removing a menace to society from society. But even that won't erase the trauma and pain that this woman suffered. It's hard for people to accept that life is sometimes egregiously unfair in this way. I feel horribly for this woman. I've experienced traumas of my own, including being the victim of a random sexual assault, but that assault did not approach the violence of this crime. Reading this article scared me, since I'm already well aware that random crimes can happen in your own home. I just hope that the victim has a strong support system and can eventually come to terms with what has happened to her.

thefinalstage

Cut his nads off, turn him upside dowm and douse the wound with salt. After a few hours cut of the salted scab, turn him the right way up and let him drain slowly.

AARRRGH

Wagon wrote: »

Death penalty time. People like that shouldn't be allowed to walk the earth.

I disagree. The guy is clearly totally mental. He should be taken out of society forever, but he shouldn't be killed.

I don't really like the death penalty in general, but I definitely don't like the idea of killing people who are mentally ****ed.

KatiexKOUTURE--

metaoblivia wrote: »

I think some people just get very frustrated that more can't be done.
It's true - no punishment can be handed down that will comfort the victim, or make what happened to her any less horrific, even the death penalty, which isn't on the cards in this case as no one was killed. Trials like this aren't about revenge - they are about removing a menace to society from society. But even that won't erase the trauma and pain that this woman suffered. It's hard for people to accept that life is sometimes egregiously unfair in this way. I feel horribly for this woman. I've experienced traumas of my own, including being the victim of a random sexual assault, but that assault did not approach the violence of this crime. Reading this article scared me, since I'm already well aware that random crimes can happen in your own home. I just hope that the victim has a strong support system and can eventually come to terms with what has happened to her.

Well said.
I don't think that any sort of punishment will be enough for this victim to get over what happend to her. But, if your man gets the death penalty it might be a bit of closure for the victim but he still has to grt a fair trial. I just hope that she gets whatever help she needs.

Red Hand

I didn't read past the Title. Some pretty messed up people out there.:(

Latchy

gogglebok wrote: »

Yes, but where do you hear this? Where are all these people who think that the rights of convicted criminals are more important than the victim's right to justice? It just doesn't sound real to me. I have never heard a news broadcast where an offender's rights seemed more important than a victim's.

An example ? ok- daily express 7/6/08

A yob who killed a grandfather by punching him in the head was yesterday jailed for just 3 years .

---

---

20, left 60 year old ---- ---- with such severe brian damage he died 24 hrs later .Last night mr

---

angry family condemned the ' derisory ' sentence .

His brother ---- 66 said ' what sort of of messeage does this send out ? We have not seen justice today .'

Derisory setence ' how many times in so many weeks ,months ,years have we heard that word ,and comments such as the victims brother said .?

perhaps i am guilty of not wording my quotes correctly but you will see what i ment was the anger of the victims family such as this mans .The people who have had their daughters raped ,sons and husbands murdered ,the people who will see some scumbag get a lighter sentence for a crime cuz that is the culture we live in now .

Comprendi ?

I have always assumed these rapist-lovers were a fervently imagined bogeyman, concocted by the kind of people who find it more comfortable to think in prefab categories like "do-gooder" and "bleeding heart liberal" than to look closely at the facts of whatever they are arguing. But I may be wrong on that, and I would welcome correction. I would certainly love a link to one of these news broadcasts.

You sound like one of those people who watch to many court room dramas ,dont talk daft .:rolleyes: Do gooders usual have guilty conscious and bleeding heart librals like the rest are after favous of some sort , political gain or both .

Surely the purpose of a lawyer in these circumstances is to put the best case possible for the client, so that nobody who enters the justice system will be disadvantaged by not having a law degree. Isn't that fair? Shouldn't everyone have that right of access to legal expertise, and not just trained lawyers?

You better believe it ...and i will leve you with a quote from convicted criminal Charles Bronson .

Quote '' "I just wish some of you cons could live my existence for just a month, then and only then you'd wake up and start to appreciate just what you have got.

"TV, radio, CDs, carpets, curtains, flasks, own clothes, open visits, phone calls, gym, pool, canteen - even the food is not so bad.

"Accept it, be grateful for it, and stop moaning about pathetic things."


you better believe it nighty night .

flanum

Well whats the conclusion? when will the result of the trial be?

Reku

In general I'd be against the death penalty since it removes the chance for the person to learn what they did was wrong, but being a lifelong criminal I doubt very much there's any hope for this lad learning. As such state execution is the perhaps the best option, certainly he should never be free again, but why should society support someone (taxes pay for keeping him imprisoned) beyond redemption? Afterall we put down dogs once they bite someone when there may have been reason behind it or they may still learn that they shouldn't do that, we view ourselves as above dogs but when we exhibit behaviour such as this I must ask how strong is that distinction that we are better than animals?
I doubt it'll be of much consolation to the victim whatever is done to him, beyond knowing that he's off the streets and can't possibly hurt her again.

gogglebok

latchyco wrote: »

perhaps i am guilty of not wording my quotes correctly but you will see what i ment was the anger of the victims family such as this mans .The people who have had their daughters raped ,sons and husbands murdered ,the people who will see some scumbag get a lighter sentence for a crime cuz that is the culture we live in now .

We agree now that nobody champions the rights of a criminal over the rights of the victim. I think we can also agree that the victims of crime, and their friends and relatives, will often feel devastating anger at the crime and at the criminal.

Is that anger the right basis for a criminal justice system? If someone grossly abused a friend of mine I might want to hurt or kill him. What a criminal justice system should do is is restrain those urges, and replace them with something safer and more intelligent. I'm going to suggest more or less the system we have now, but with greater effort put into rehabiliation.

What do you suggest?

chuci

Just read that story its so sick my god. the part where he slit her eyelids i nearly puked. When will the verdict be out?

Steve_o

The Scientist wrote: »

Death is too easy a punishment for him.

Hung, drawn & quartered.

+1
Sick f***ers like that deserve it.....

Irishcrx

Jesus christ...what a sick bastard...I'm lost for words.

Death penalty without a shadow of a doubt, he deserves it.

all the stars

thats just horrific.

How on earth did he already get convicted of murder as a juvinile and all those other convictions along the way? How did someone not see this? this woman will never, ever be right for the rest of her life. No doubt, She will never recover emotionally and possibly will be eternally scarred physically.

I just dont know what to think. You couldn't imagine doing that to a dog, never mind a person who is actually begging you to stop.
Im so deeply troubled by the way things are going in the world

Gillie

The guy should be beaten to death.

It is amazing that someone could do such things to another living thing!
I'd love to have 12 hours with him! Save the american tax payer a lot of money.

Someone mentioned castration and life in prison. A good start I reckon!

That poor poor woman will never be right!

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

The Bollox

The Scientist wrote: »

Death is too easy a punishment for him.

Hung, drawn & quartered.

+1

this stuff makes me sick to my stomach

Pen1987

Isnt there a CSI/Criminal Minds/One of those similar shows with almost that exact same plotline? Im sure Id seen something like that before, right down to the attempted removal of the victims sight.

kryogen

that turned my stomach a little when i read it, the cruelty humans can do on each other still amazes and shocks me sometimes, then i realise im probably not much different because if i got my hands in that guy it would be a coat hanger down the japs eyes treatment he would get, then electrodes strapped to his testicles for some shock treatment and a scene from the film carver would be re enacted with him as the murder victim in the outhouse while i popped his testicle with a plyers

these are some of the things i would like to do to him, i dont know if i could do those kinds of things to another human being, but sometimes i think an eye for an eye is called for and other times i think and eye for an eye eventually leaves us all blind! im so conflicted

my thoughts and sympathy are with the woman, its going to be a hell of a long road for her to ever recover form this experience.

Latchy

gogglebok wrote: »

We agree now that nobody champions the rights of a criminal over the rights of the victim. I think we can also agree that the victims of crime, and their friends and relatives, will often feel devastating anger at the crime and at the criminal.

+ 1 ,we can never put into words or underestimate the pain and anger of vitims and familys and in a lot of cases it spurs them on to campaign for others in similar situations .

Is that anger the right basis for a criminal justice system? If someone grossly abused a friend of mine I might want to hurt or kill him. What a criminal justice system should do is is restrain those urges, and replace them with something safer and more intelligent. I'm going to suggest more or less the system we have now, but with greater effort put into rehabiliation.

What do you suggest?

Greater effort has to be the way with rehabilitation but it has to come from the criminal .He/she has to really want to turn a leaf otherwise we are back to the same old cirlce of criminal goes to jail ,criminal has easy life in jail ,criminal learns new ways and skills in how to commit crime .

What saddens me is to see serous offenders show little or no remorse when convicted .The ones who stick two fingers and laugh at victims and familys ,and only bothered that they were caught and that's not including serial killers but your average serious assult ,robber ,rape, criminal .

I am not sure all can be rehabilitated .I do wonder if jail term was a lot hasher the death penalty was re introduced for serious crimes in this part of the world would, it act as a deterrent ?

ejmaztec

I see that the victim was giving evidence yesterday. The first time that she was in court, the defendant refused to attend.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06102008/news/regionalnews/co_eds_courage_114889.htm

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

unreggd

trout wrote: »

Will have to keep an eye out for the verdict.

Pun intended????

TripleAce

Sick reading, couldn't even finish it.... :mad:

Death penalty wouldn't even be enough for me in these cases.