Family law judge beats own daughter for using the internet

dark crystal

Lavezzi wrote: »

What do you mean "the world"? 99% of people in the thread deeply condemned it

Legally, he was given a pass, as it was deemed acceptable punishment.

Would you condemn it?

Biggins

saywhatyousee wrote: »

What a disgraceful post especially from a mod.You did not even try to validate any of the points you quoted you continuously just accused him trolling.Just because he does not agree to your view point does not mean he is trolling

Absolute rubbish. Stop being so bloody blind.

Rule 101. You don't feed a troll if you can help it!
Its very clear to me (and I suspect a few others) there is a troll here.

paddyandy

A troll is someone you constantly disagree with while having no alternative argument of your own to suit the Politically Correct Lunacy of our times.A generation that is garrulous but without the wisdom of many generations.An Age that has no real solutions but plenty of waffle that has little substance.Ireland has 500 +- SUICIDES a year.What do you suggest Biggins?

Biggins

paddyandy wrote: »

A troll is someone you constantly disagree with while having no alternative argument of your own to suit the Politically Correct Lunacy of our times.A generation that is garrulous but without the wisdom of many generations.An Age that has no real solutions but plenty of waffle that has little substance.Ireland has 500 +- SUICIDES a year.What do you suggest Biggins?

Bye.

wonderfulname

dark crystal wrote: »

Legally, he was given a pass, as it was deemed acceptable punishment.

Would you condemn it?

Tut tut, assumptions are bad, legally, he was given a pass because the abuse happened more than five years ago and hence could not be prosecuted against in the state of Texas.

hooradiation

paddyandy wrote: »

A troll is someone you constantly disagree with while having no alternative argument of your own to suit the Politically Correct Lunacy of our times.A generation that is garrulous but without the wisdom of many generations.An Age that has no real solutions but plenty of waffle that has little substance.Ireland has 500 +- SUICIDES a year.What do you suggest Biggins?

You must have those rose tinted glasses welded onto that head of yours.

Wolfe Tone

Dudess wrote: »

Oh you got in liberal, sheeple and PC - you must feel so intelligent. People who express unpopular opinions aren't trolls, people who troll are trolls. Now, this thread is purely about the abuse carried out by that man, not discipline in general, so people can criticise it all they want without getting insults thrown at them, and damn right they can comment that the man has no right to raise his disabled kid that way.
What's PC or liberal or sheeple about being appalled by the abuse? You just have to say them even when they're not relevant is it? You don't appear to know what they mean. Sheeple are people who disagree with child abuse - yep, whatever. You keep telling yourself that. Nobody said kids don't need discipline, but there's a difference between discipline and extreme intimidation.

And the state shouldn't have a say when someone abuses their kid? Sure. Lol at the defence of that poster - you're very gullible. It's plain as day he's a wind-up merchant, have a look at his posting history.

Defending the abuse of that kid - you must be so proud of yourselves.

Kindly point out where I defended it, let me help you, I didn't.

KeithM89_old

paddyandy wrote: »

A troll is someone you constantly disagree with while having no alternative argument of your own to suit the Politically Correct Lunacy of our times.A generation that is garrulous but without the wisdom of many generations.An Age that has no real solutions but plenty of waffle that has little substance.Ireland has 500 +- SUICIDES a year.What do you suggest Biggins?

Banned

johnnyskeleton

KeithM89 wrote: »

Banned

Aw no. Now he's going to start trolling all the other fora.

Dudess

You read it here folks: objecting to physically and verbally terrorising and humiliating a disabled child is politically correct lunacy. It prevents suicide - or something. Wolfe Tone, I wasn't referring to you - although it's bizarre that you didn't spot anything other than a wind-up.

Biggins wrote: »

saywhatyousee wrote: »

What a disgraceful post especially from a mod.You did not even try to validate any of the points you quoted you continuously just accused him trolling.Just because he does not agree to your view point does not mean he is trolling

Absolute rubbish. Stop being so bloody blind.

Rule 101. You don't feed a troll if you can help it!
Its very clear to me (and I suspect a few others) there is a troll here.

Yeah, whenever someone defends a blatant troll and uses the old "They're not a troll just because they disagree with you" line, it just looks like going against the grain for the sake of it. Surely it's easy to tell the difference between dissenting opinion and being on a wind-up and not bothering to back up outlandish statements?

Wolfe Tone

Well Dudess, many people actually hold such views, counterproductive to write them off as the shenanigans of a troll. It wasn't defending, I would have a much higher view of a troll then someone who actually thinks such things.

Dudess

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Well Dudess, many people actually hold such views, counterproductive to write them off as the shenanigans of a troll. It wasn't defending, I would have a much higher view of a troll then someone who actually thinks such things.

If they genuinely did though, they'd back them up. That judge's behaviour is upsetting - anyone who defends it deserves to be challenged.

J. Marston

Lavezzi wrote: »

I have to say, it's pathetic how anyone who doesn't coincide with popular opinion is called a troll and how everyone rides the PC train by making false assumptions and twisting words around knowing they won't be called out for it because they're bahing along with all the other sheeple. Liberal fascism at it's finest.

No sane person will argue the fact it was harsh. But not so harsh that you sheeple or the state should have the right to input your say in how he disciplines HIS children.

It's a classic case of liberal sheeple imagining we are living in a perfect world. Disciplining your children is essential because it takes away some of their power when they perceive they have too much of it, producing more humble disciplined individuals. One of the reasons we have so many egotistical fools nowadays in the West is because they were never disciplined properly or at all as children.

Ha, sheeple. I like that word.

Still think what you typed was a load of shíte though.

Wait, does that make me a sheeple...a sheeperson....a sheepson?

Truley

Wow that video is horrific The mother was just as bad if not worse. I get the impression she was egging the father on especially in the bits where they're off camera, and she seems to be enjoying every minute of it. Nice save trying to play the abused wife card to the media. I can't believe the daughter is ok with it. Sick.

Dudess

Truley wrote: »

Wow that video is horrific The mother was just as bad if not worse. I get the impression she was egging the father on especially in the bits where they're off camera, and she seems to be enjoying every minute of it. Nice save trying to play the abused wife card to the media. I can't believe the daughter is ok with it. Sick.

I initially wondered why there was so little mention of the mother - thought she seemed vile. But to suggest she might be worse than the father is not reasonable. Plus, maybe she was so abused that he had that much control over her. Maybe not, but the suggestion should not be dismissed readily IMO.
Even if women get more sympathy in these situations than men (which is terribly wrong of course) doesn't create an excuse for rubbishing a woman's claim that she was coerced into doing awful things.

Truley

Dudess wrote: »

I initially wondered why there was so little mention of the mother - thought she seemed vile. But to suggest she might be worse than the father is not reasonable. Plus, maybe she was so abused that he had that much control over her. Maybe not, but the suggestion should not be dismissed readily IMO.
Even if women get more sympathy in these situations than men (which is terribly wrong of course) doesn't create an excuse for rubbishing a woman's claim that she was coerced into doing awful things.

Maybe but I don't see any evidence of the father coercing the mother in this footage in fact it looks like quite the opposite is the case, with the mother trying pretty hard to 'join in' with little persuasion. For a lot of the ordeal she's alone in the room with the daughter, and spends a good bit of time at the end of the footage taunting her with the father well gone by that stage. Yes she's every bit as bad as the father in that footage and more so with the way she refuses to take responsibility for her horrific actions. She can't claim to be 'brainwashed' into doing it any more than the father has been 'brainwashed' by his parents or whoever he learned that abuse from.

Dudess

Living in the same house as him, she might have been next had she not complied. It's strange how fear can make a monster of people but it can.
Then again maybe she was just as much a despicable bully as her husband and now playing the handy downtrodden woman card.

Hard to know for sure...

Biggins

Truley wrote: »

Wow that video is horrific The mother was just as bad if not worse. I get the impression she was egging the father on especially in the bits where they're off camera, and she seems to be enjoying every minute of it. Nice save trying to play the abused wife card to the media. I can't believe the daughter is ok with it. Sick.

No evidence either way but one might wonder if there is a touch of Stockholm Syndrome.

Truley

Biggins wrote: »

No evidence either way but one might wonder if there is a touch of Stockholm Syndrome.

Personally I don't care. Even if she was on the receiving end of violence/coercion (which she hasn't actually said, only that she was 'brainwashed' by him) in this particular instance she isn't being forced to grab the belt, to join in, to strike her daughter, to shout at her, to stay in the room for a few minutes afterwards. We're all brainwashed to a certain extent but when do we draw the line between blaming other people and taking responsibility for our own actions.

Biggins

Truley wrote: »

Personally I don't care. Even if she was on the receiving end of violence/coercion (which she hasn't actually said, only that she was 'brainwashed' by him) in this particular instance she isn't being forced to grab the belt, to join in, to strike her daughter, to shout at her, to stay in the room for a few minutes afterwards. We're all brainwashed to a certain extent but when do we draw the line between blaming other people and taking responsibility for our own actions.

Please note: I was not talking about the mother - but about the daughter ("...I can't believe the daughter is ok with it").

She seems to have accepted a lot more than most people might.
If she can forgive and forget, fair play to her - however I also know (and have come into contact with people in similar situation) that some people under same brutality, become somewhat brainwashed into thinking that its might have been their fault and/or that it was only to be accepted/accept at such a level!
(short version)

Truley

Biggins wrote: »

Please note: I was not talking about the mother - but about the daughter ("...I can't believe the daughter is ok with it").

She seems to have accepted a lot more than most people might.
If she can forgive and forget, fair play to her - however I also know (and have come into contact with people in similar situation) that some people under same brutality, become somewhat brainwashed into thinking that its might have been their fault and/or that it was only to be accepted/accept at such a level!
(short version)

Yeah sorry, I know what you mean. She has acted very forgiving towards both parents and if she can do that, fair play to her. I know I would be feeling very bitter and angry if I was her.

ringadingding

I thought the mother was originally trying to take the belt to hit her softly and bring an end to the beating........... but NOPE they continued.

I have no sympathy/compassion for the mother, if it meant her taking the beating herself afterwards, then so be it. Why is it ok for her daughter to get the beating and not her???

She allowed her husband to beat her children, she joined in. IMO she even antagonised the situation a bit.

Mothers are let off the hook all to often in these cases.

The thoughts of my daughter getting beaten like this makes me feel dizzy.

CUNTS , and I really mean that. I hope the guy loses everything.

Dudess

Yeah, the more I think about it, the less convinced I am that the mother was terrorised... although I wouldn't rule it out completely. The ****er could beat his disabled daughter, therefore he no doubt could beat his wife.

bodhrandude

FootShooter wrote: »

There's a video posted 5 hours ago on Reddit, now on top of Reddit. An Aransas County (Texas) judge beating his own daughter with a belt for using the internet. The daughter posted the video online and on Reddit. Not going to link the video here, because it's probably against the terms of use on boards. Absolutely disgraceful stuff. Hope he's convicted of child abuse and sent to jail for several years.

Video was made in 2004 when she was 15. She's 23 now and living on her own, according to youtube comments made by herself.

OP you never mentioned the mother taking part as well, shocking.

tiger55

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8Ma6g2vPRg

CageWager

I'm only after watching the video now after a friend showed to to me (missed this in the news a few weeks back). I'm literally raging now, I would give anything to be alone in a room (with no camera's;)) with that c*nt and see how well he takes a beating. beating a little girl is one of the most sickening things a "man" can do. I use the word "man" very loosely in this case.