|
Post by JonathanE on Mar 18, 2009 18:39:23 GMT -5
Thank you for saying that. Over on the other board, I got raked over the coals when I pointed this fact out as justification for not joining a lynch mob that was starting to form. ___________________________________________________ No, this is Skyfire's attempt to derail a thread by grasping at a straw. The straw-grasping is because of his defense of the indefensible in the "Morman Gulag" thread on the old board. Skyfire, you lost that one, let it go. The poster you quoted didn't mean what you think he meant. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Am I misinterpreting or is that a rational thought from Skyfire? Has hell frozen over?? In answer to this question, no, it isn't - see above. That being said, there are cases of false accusations, but no-one gets charged and convicted solely on the evidence of the victim. There must be corraborating evidence, or it would not be tried. They may get investigated on a witness' say so, but there would have to be other evidence, or a shitload of witnesses, so I don't think that what you alluded to applies to DP cases
|
|
|
Post by brendanjd on Mar 18, 2009 18:47:05 GMT -5
That being said, there are cases of false accusations, but no-one gets charged and convicted solely on the evidence of the victim. There must be corraborating evidence, or it would not be tried. They may get investigated on a witness' say so, but there would have to be other evidence, or a shitload of witnesses, so I don't think that what you alluded to applies to DP cases And yet Steven Truscott was convicted of murder and sentenced to hang when he was 14 on evidence that accumulated to someone saying "I saw him give the victim a ride on the crossbar of his bike one day". Or perhaps David Milgaard, sentenced to life (would have been death if it had been 15 years earlier) for a murder he did not commit, based on coerced testimony and little real police work. Or how about the West Memphis Three? I'm not totally convinced they did it. There was no DNA or other types of damning evidence, hell there is more damning evidence (DNA in the ropes used to bind the boys) that didn't belong to any of the three. Yet Echols (sp?) is sentenced to die. You can be convicted of a crime for simply being the wrong place at the wrong time. Capital crimes are no different.
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Mar 18, 2009 19:09:33 GMT -5
That being said, there are cases of false accusations, but no-one gets charged and convicted solely on the evidence of the victim. There must be corraborating evidence, or it would not be tried. They may get investigated on a witness' say so, but there would have to be other evidence, or a shitload of witnesses, so I don't think that what you alluded to applies to DP cases And yet Steven Truscott was convicted of murder and sentenced to hang when he was 14 on evidence that accumulated to someone saying "I saw him give the victim a ride on the crossbar of his bike one day". Or perhaps David Milgaard, sentenced to life (would have been death if it had been 15 years earlier) for a murder he did not commit, based on coerced testimony and little real police work. Or how about the West Memphis Three? I'm not totally convinced they did it. There was no DNA or other types of damning evidence, hell there is more damning evidence (DNA in the ropes used to bind the boys) that didn't belong to any of the three. Yet Echols (sp?) is sentenced to die. You can be convicted of a crime for simply being the wrong place at the wrong time. Capital crimes are no different. Stephen Truscott's case was abhorrent, but there was corraborative evidence, although no actual witnesses. He was surely scape-goated, and sentenced to hang. The sentence was commuted to life, early on. His is a prime example of why there should NOT be a death penalty. Police sometimes rush to judgement. Juries place a lot of weight in favour of conviction solely because a person has been formally accused and charged with the crime, and this also skews trial results. An otherwise fair and impartial jurist is often swayed, somewhat, in favour the prosecution, simply by the fact that the person is in court, facing the charge, making the defense attorney's job that much more difficult. In an earlier post, I summed up my opposition to the DP.
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Mar 18, 2009 23:50:26 GMT -5
Not that I'm not saying rape, child molestation, and domestic abuse/murder don't deserve the DP. But you have to think about it. Kids make shit up all the time. Disgruntled spouses do the same. If they didn't, there wouldn't be any cases of one parent brainwashing the kid against the other. Thank you for saying that. Over on the other board, I got raked over the coals when I pointed this fact out as justification for not joining a lynch mob that was starting to form. Oh....my...glowing ball of light that lives in my head. Do you not get why you were raked over the coals in that thread? Are you seriouslly that dense? You got raked over the coals, not because you didn't agree with anyone, but because you were BLAMING THE VICTEM! JEBUS! Anyways, I'm for the death penalty. You take a life in cold blood(notice the qualifier there), you die. You rape a child, you die. I'm not going for deterinte. I'm going for justice. Ironbite-and when you explain to the Final Judge about your actions, I hope you enjoy your long burning sentence.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Mar 19, 2009 2:24:28 GMT -5
So's the death penalty *zing* [/saving face] It just looked like a trap. But then he was like, "yes." No qualifications. Interesting. Well, he did phrase it snottily as if we were supposed to assume as opposed to making sure of something before stating it as fact. Now if we had gone ahead and stated it as fact, I could imagine, from the actions of skyfire in the past, he would say, "I never said i supported it..."
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Mar 19, 2009 2:29:35 GMT -5
@ Skyfire: We had a guy up here in Canada. His name was David Milgaard. He was convicted in the 70's for raping and brutally murdering a young nurse. He was given a life sentence, no parole. In the 90's it was discovered through DNA evidence that he was not, after all, the killer. Some fucked named Larry Fisher was. If the DP was still legal when David was convicted, I have no doubt that he would have been hung like a dog. That's why I'm against the DP. It's too sure. There is no going back. Say what you want about revolving door prisons, but to use the DP is simply barbaric. I highlighted very important parts of your post. I'm not saying that DNA evidence is perfect. But the use of DNA evidence should, over time, drastically reduce the number of wrongful convictions. And how does that help the murdered and raped innocent people in the meantime exactly? Time sorts out a lot of problems, but what about figuring out how to halt the problems from the get go? You'd be singing a different, higher-pitched tone if it had been YOU getting assbanged in prison for 20 years over some brutal rape/murder that you never did to begin with.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Mar 19, 2009 2:31:48 GMT -5
Hey Sky...you were doing very well until you went into that whole prison rape thing. Should've stopped before you went overboard. Just ensuring that everyone was clear on the point. BTW, what I said was actually quite mundane compared to what can show up in even the intro CJ classes. One of my brothers was a CJ major, and the prof for his intro class made it a point to do a slide show of the most disturbing pictures he can find for the sake of weeding out any students who weren't strong enough to handle the job. Turns out that you can, indeed, kill someone with a spoon... Wow. You seem to have quite the fascination with prison, male on male sodomy and brutal murders. way to revel in filth.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Mar 19, 2009 2:34:02 GMT -5
Damn, how much does that suck, killed with a spoon? Thats...uhh...amazeing... I was talking about how people kill each other inside, which was what the conversation was about, I thought anyway, but apparently I was wrong. Go figure... The entire CJ field is littered with tales such as that. If you've got the time or inclination, track down a series entitled "Homicidal Humor." This is a series written by assorted police officers (I have the "South Texas edition" which covers Houston and the surrounding area) and retelling incidents from their careers. The series is filled to the brim with black humor because some of the things the officers have encountered over the years were so shocking or inhuman that humor was one of the few ways to deal with it. You guys wanna stick to the fucking op or do we want this to be a graphic and rambling thread about the sickest fucks in american prisons? Sky? Any more assraping stories or punctured hearts or multiple murder stories for us?
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Mar 19, 2009 2:36:05 GMT -5
I'm a little late getting to my own thread, but here's my take on the matter. Imagine, if you will, a sadistic killer. This person has been put on death row, and by some miracle, gets executed in a reasonable amount of time. Bam. He's gone. No more consciousness. He's dead, and there's no way that he will ever reflect on what he did. But let's take that same person and put him in an empty room in solitary confinement. He has a cot and a toilet. That's it. No Internet access, no books, no paper to write on, nothing. He gets a meal a day pushed through a flap- no human contact. He has been condemned to live out his life in silence, with nothing to do other than contemplate what he's done. To me, that's a harsher punishment than death. Killing someone ends their thought process. Leaving someone with only their thoughts, now that's a real punishment. I grew up in rural minnesota, the oldest of four boys. I've DONE that. I'd much rather spend time with my mind and memories then die.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Mar 19, 2009 2:49:01 GMT -5
Well, the two most often cited reasons for the death penalty are that it's cheaper than keeping the inmate in prison (which is absolutely is not) and that it is a deterrent to other potential criminals (which is absolutely is not). Beyond these two demostratably false reasons, there really is not justification other than "God wants it that way" or societal revenge. The only reason DP is more expensive is that these pieces of SHIT get endless appeals and do everything they can to keep their case tied up in court. If we'd limit them to a fixed number of appeals, within a time limit (two appeals, three years), and set a maximum time frame from sentencing to actual execution (six years would be fair), we'd save a shit ton of money, time, and other resources better used fighting ongoing crime. I honestly don't CARE if the convict is mentally ill, or retarded, or whatever excuse he comes up with -- he should still be held fully responsible for his actions. There is no such thing as "mitigating circumstances", because this usually means the offender was high or drunk and "didn't know what they were doing", which is a bunch of bullshit. I don't believe in the insanity defense, either -- it's just another way for this scum to dodge justice. But you are assuming every person who is put on trial is guilty.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Mar 19, 2009 2:56:56 GMT -5
Not that I'm not saying rape, child molestation, and domestic abuse/murder don't deserve the DP. But you have to think about it. Kids make shit up all the time. Disgruntled spouses do the same. If they didn't, there wouldn't be any cases of one parent brainwashing the kid against the other. Thank you for saying that. Over on the other board, I got raked over the coals when I pointed this fact out as justification for not joining a lynch mob that was starting to form. You normally get raked over the coals "held accountable" for extreme and out of the norm scenarios that you try to pass off as common. You were willing to allow children to stay with potential child molesters solely because at some time, in some other place, some other kids have accused adults of molestation because they were little shitheads. You were also shown that the times that similar false accusations are made equal less than one percentage of the time. You still refused to change your stance. So if it was anything like that little exercise, you were merely being treated like an adult for the words that YOU yourself had said. Way to act like your are mercilessly picked on for no reason. That's what immature assholes like to pretend is going on when they are held to their own words.
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Mar 21, 2009 18:39:18 GMT -5
Look, I just think the whole appeals process is too long and drawn out, and that costs money. Limiting the process is just practical. OR we could get creative with sentencing.
Rapists -- castrate them slowly with a dull wooden spoon. (No anasthesia, thx.) Then, insert a spiked anal pear and open, the degree of "opening" depending on the nature of the rape.
Child molesters -- remove their hands, sew their mouths shut (insert a feeding tube, naturally), castrate them, and toss 'em into general population. MAKE SURE THE WHOLE PRISON KNOWS OF THEIR CRIMES, INCLUDING ALL THE LITTLE DETAILS. Sit back and watch as justice is done.
Abusers -- Remove arms and legs, sew the mouth shut (feeding tube!), put them in the general population, advertise their crimes, and let justice prevail.
Muderers -- the victim's family gets to choose the method of execution. ANY method they deem fit, be it hanging, electrocution, or smeared with honey and staked down to a nest of fire ants. Creativity should be rewarded.
My point is, these "people" contribute nothing to society, and their victims have to live the rest of our lives with what THEY did to US. Why should WE suffer for a lifetime, while THEY get off with a slap on the wrist and a stern warning?
Some children lie, but those who lie about molestation are COACHED BY AN ADULT to say that "Daddy touched me", or they've learned that it's a quick way to get attention. All allegations of child molestation *should* be thoroughly investigated.
Some women lie. A full investigation will quickly determine if she is or isn't telling the truth about rape or abuse. It's hard to fake rape trauma.
|
|
|
Post by brendanjd on Mar 21, 2009 19:27:52 GMT -5
Look, I just think the whole appeals process is too long and drawn out, and that costs money. Limiting the process is just practical. OR we could get creative with sentencing. Sure you could do that. Or you could abide by the rights guaranteed to your fellow citizens, which you endorsed by being part of the State in which you live. Rapists -- castrate them slowly with a dull wooden spoon. (No anasthesia, thx.) Then, insert a spiked anal pear and open, the degree of "opening" depending on the nature of the rape. Child molesters -- remove their hands, sew their mouths shut (insert a feeding tube, naturally), castrate them, and toss 'em into general population. MAKE SURE THE WHOLE PRISON KNOWS OF THEIR CRIMES, INCLUDING ALL THE LITTLE DETAILS. Sit back and watch as justice is done. Abusers -- Remove arms and legs, sew the mouth shut (feeding tube!), put them in the general population, advertise their crimes, and let justice prevail. Muderers -- the victim's family gets to choose the method of execution. ANY method they deem fit, be it hanging, electrocution, or smeared with honey and staked down to a nest of fire ants. Creativity should be rewarded. See above. My point is, these "people" contribute nothing to society, and their victims have to live the rest of our lives with what THEY did to US. Why should WE suffer for a lifetime, while THEY get off with a slap on the wrist and a stern warning? A life sentence is not a 'slap on the wrist'. I'll be the first to admit the justice system fails to punish perfectly some times. But I would rather have a system that fails some of the time than a system that fails all the time, like the one you apparently want. Another thing, any time spent in jail is not a 'slap on the wrist'. From the stories that my future father-in-law (he spent 12 years in jail, and is on probation for the rest of his life) told me, jail is anything but. Some children lie, but those who lie about molestation are COACHED BY AN ADULT to say that "Daddy touched me", or they've learned that it's a quick way to get attention. All allegations of child molestation *should* be thoroughly investigated. The operative word here is 'should'. Of course they should. But guess what? They are not always. In fact, even when they are people still end up in jail. There was a daycare that got busted for abuse during the Satanic Panic. Even though shrinks said the kids were faking, people were still sentenced to decades of jail time. You may find these people repugnant. I do as well. But I will not, under any circumstances, allow the State to have the power of life and death. To hand over that power to the State is to destroy the very function of the State, to protect and serve. When you hand your life over to the State to have it do as it pleases, you lose any sense of security the State was supposed to provide.
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Mar 21, 2009 20:08:03 GMT -5
This has not been answered:
In my opinion, murder is the killing of a person without the need to via self-defense, or some other defense. Why should this revenge killing, which protects nobody, be regarded as anything but?
Also, the question of why still has not been answered. Why do we want to inflict such great punishments on people who are far more like to be innocent because of the discriminatory waiving of appeal rights for them (because accusation of a severe crime is proof)? Here's the important bit: it doesn't help anyone. What other reason could there be for punishment?
|
|
|
Post by canadian mojo on Mar 21, 2009 21:48:09 GMT -5
What other reason could there be for punishment? How about this: murder, rape, child molestation, abuse, and similar crimes are an attack on the very foundations that society is built on. If a foreign nation attacks your society you call up the army, kill thousands or millions of people - many of whom had nothing to do with it, and call yourself a better people for it.
|
|