Never have I heard such a line of gak.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/11/16452936-defense-attorney-blames-victim-in-india-gang-rape-murder-case?lite

For those at work....

By Kari Huus, Staff Writer, NBC News
The attorney representing three men charged with gang rape and murder in India told an interviewer that the woman who died and her male companion were to blame for the attack, which took place on a moving bus in New Delhi, according to a report published Thursday.
"Until today I have not seen a single incident or example of rape with a respected lady," Manohar Lal Sharma said, according to the Bloomberg report. "Even an underworld don would not like to touch a girl with respect."
The Dec. 16 attack left the 23-year-old physiotherapy student and her companion, who was also beaten, bleeding on a highway. The woman died from her injuries two weeks later in a Singapore hospitial

Sharma, who is representing three of the five individuals charged in the attack, said Wednesday that his clients would plead not guilty to all charges in the case. Two other men have been charged in the attack, and a third was implicated but will be tried separately because he is a minor.


The lawyer's comments, which echoed those by some conservative religious and political figures, were likely to meet with more outrage from India’s urban middle class, which has spearheaded fierce protests against the government and police for their perceived failure to protect women from violence.
But they reflected a traditional chauvinism that is still held by many in the populous country.
"Guilt is not one-sided," Indian spiritual leader Asaram Bapu, told followers earlier in the week, adding that if the woman had pleaded with her six attackers in God's name, and told them she was of the "weaker sex," they would have relented, Reuters reported.
Mohan Bhagwat, a conservative pro-Hindu politician, weighed in with his view that rape occurs only in Indian cities, because women there adopt western lifestyles, but not in rural India.
But that view is contradicted by data, Reuters reported, citing the National Commission for Women, which has documented a pattern of gang rape and sexual humiliation of lower caste women in rural India.
Bhaskara Rao, who heads the New Delhi-based policy think tank said Bhagwat's comments reflected a traditional, rural society amid a country in transition.
"The people who are there in the police, judiciary, politics — they are old minds trying to deal with new problems," she said.
Reuters contributed to this report.

That's their defence?
My clients aren't guilty because the victim wasn't a respected lady?

And she wasn't a respected lady because she was raped?

Seriously?
This guy should be executed along with the rapists. Sorry. Not executed. Put down.

I stopped reading.... right about..... here...

Some Douche Nozzle wrote:"Until today I have not seen a single incident or example of rape with a respected lady,"

Yep right there!


Excuse me while i line up a wall of facepalms. Here goes.

Spoilered for your consideration.

"Guilt is not one-sided," Indian spiritual leader Asaram Bapu, told followers earlier in the week, adding that if the woman had pleaded with her six attackers in God's name, and told them she was of the "weaker sex," they would have relented, Reuters reported.

This is... Just absolutely appalling.

"Even an underworld don would not like to touch a girl with respect."

WHAT THE FETH?!?!?
I know well respected girls that have been raped! What the feth is wrong with these people?

My opinion of defense attorneys just lowered quite a bit.

This particular one should be thrown in jail along with his clients.

My question is why these leaders are trying to defend these men when much of the regular populace knows what they did was wrong?

It seems to be wilfully ignorant to a point insanity.

I'm all for blaming the victim and all but... wow...

Wow that is ridiculous.

Does anyone have any knowledge of rape in India though? Although it seems like a completely ridiculous and horrible idea, maybe the guy is right? Would be very odd and I can't see why someone sick enough to rape a women would care wether the victim is respected or not, but maybe that does happen in India?

Even if that is the case (very very unlikely) how on earth is it a defence? And how can lawyers do that? When you read a story like this you can see why many have very low opinions of lawyers in general. I don't think I could stand up in a court and try and get an obvious criminal off their charges...

clively wrote:My opinion of defense attorneys just lowered quite a bit.

It shouldn't. New Dehli is not an insubstantial city and yet yesterday was the first day any of these men had a lawyer, after most of the Indian capitols lawyers refused to represent a pack of gang rapists.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:I'm all for blaming the victim and all but... wow...

ORLY? What are YOU blaming this victim for?

The police said the men were looking for some fun. They had been drinking, having a party, and decided to go on a joy ride. They began circling the capital in a private bus, the police said, when they spotted a couple looking for a ride home. They waved the man and woman onboard and charged them each 36 cents.

And then, the police said, the men beat the couple with an iron rod and repeatedly raped the woman as the bus circled the city. The woman suffered severe injuries to her head and intestines and required multiple operations.

 AustonT wrote:

ORLY? What are YOU blaming this victim for?

It's a Dakka in-joke. "Blame the victim!" always gets posted sooner or later in threads like this.

Wow, just wow.

This is awful but the victim is blamed in most defence strategies (BTW this is not my condoning it before anyone says so), the idea that rape is the victims fault is the reason that we have "slut walks" and take back the night rallies.

Some people are happy to blame the woman because she was asking for it, dressed provocatively, had any sexual partners before marriage, morning after regret and a whole host of bs reasons.

It is gak and it is awful but politicians get away with saying gak like this all the time in certain parts of the world. It is part of a fundamental lack of understanding of what rape is and how it effects people. In their mind "it's just sex right?" and they think the woman gave consent at some point to it by smiling back, getting in a car or for the reasons I gave above.
The same people that rape doesn't happen to men either.

For all of the above and more there is such a low % of cases reported and an even lower number going to conviction.

Of course that shaky defense doesn't work because the victim died. I think there are plenty of Rape cases where the perp didn't intend to rape anyone, it just happened. Its still rape of course and just punishment is deserved.

But this seems open and shut to me. Does India still execute people by having an Elephant crush their chest?

There is a huge cultural change going on in India at the moment, including a lot of change on attitudes towards women. One of the reasons there has been such a huge outcry in India regards this case is because the number of people calling for modernisation of attitudes has grown large enough to start challanging the established order (subscribed to by the many of those in power and the growingly "disenfranchised" male population which is angry at the growing power of women) much more openly.

10 or 15 years ago? This would have been swept under the rug almost entirely. Even today only something like 1 in 600 rape victims in India actually secure some kind of conviction (I seem to recall that is the rate I heard quoted).

It is me, or most of the "blame the victim" strategies on rape cases actually backfire and are denigrant to men?

What do I mean?

"She was dressex in X way", "She was at Y place at Z hour" and so. Soooooooo, we're agreeing that we are so civilized that we can't control animal behaviours?

And then the same men try to portray women as inferior... gee.

 Dark wrote:
It is me, or most of the "blame the victim" strategies on rape cases actually backfire and are denigrant to men?

What do I mean?

"She was dressex in X way", "She was at Y place at Z hour" and so.

I think the line of thinking for that strategy is that if X, Y, and Z are true that the women in question wanted sex. And in cases where there was no verbal protest it might hold some water because consent doesn't have to be verbal. And verbal consent is not always valid.

Of course since I am sure the victim was giving clear communications that she was not giving consent in this case the above wouldn't apply.

 Grey Templar wrote:
nd in cases where there was no verbal protest it might hold some water because consent doesn't have to be verbal. And verbal consent is not always valid.

Depends where you are as to what constitutes consent, or the lack there of. Generally if consent cannot be given (ie due to incoherent drunkness, being passed out, etc), then anything done with that person is not consensual, since informed consent cannot have been given. If any objections are raised at any point before or during the act, consent can be considered to have been withdrawn and any further action (other than to stop) would be considered rape.

But again, laws and attitudes vary.

Well yeah, if the person is unable to give consent for any reason(underage, intoxicated, etc) then any consent that is given is invalid and the automatic reply given is No.


It gets stickier when the person seems able to give or has given consent. Such as an example given in my College orientation on the subject.

The victim in question went to a party and got drunk to the point where she blacked out. She met this guy there prior to getting drunk. The guy took her back to her apartment and things happened. According to him she appeared concious and consentual. It is a known fact that in a blackout a person can still appear fully functional.

It later turned out that he had been serving her Jello shots that had been made with Everclear, and was aware of what was in them. She had a total of 8 of them, plus the 4 beers she had had earlier.

So it turned out he should have known it was impossable for her to be unable to give consent. But if he had not been aware of how drunk she was it may have been a different story.

This is what happens when a culture raises men to think women are inferior, where women are subservient to men and a lesser being. She should have begged them not to rape her? Because she would have been asking for a favour, clearly. The man saying this is a total gak, I find people like him loathsome. But he won't be alone in thinking like this, and much as we are shocked by backward pigs saying these things in foreign countries, these views exist in some people everywhere.

And to this specific case, I don't think we can claim a lass gave consent or gave "the right messages" when she had to be beaten the crap out of her in order to get raped.

(I'm not saying that if there's no beating there's no rape, I'm just emphasizing that there was also a beating in order to achieve it in this particular case).

Absolutly, that was kinda my point. There is no murkyness here unlike some other rape cases.

liturgies of blood wrote: "slut walks"

Were I ten years younger and had no idea of the context, I'd say that sounds just lovely.

Bran Dawri wrote:
That's their defence?
My clients aren't guilty because the victim wasn't a respected lady?

And she wasn't a respected lady because she was raped?

Seriously?
This guy should be executed along with the rapists. Sorry. Not executed. Put down.

Sadly these types of claims are quite common :(

Oh, that's pleasant...

The world is such a gakky place sometimes. :(

What in the nine circles of hell....

This is disgusting. In every possible way.

 Asherian Command wrote:
For those at work....

"The people who are there in the police, judiciary, politics — they are old minds trying to deal with new problems," she said.

More like old minds who can't get with the program. It's 2013 and we're still having this kind of gender inequality.

Sad day.

What are these 'new problems'? Rape is not a new phenomenon is it?

 Necroshea wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
For those at work....

"The people who are there in the police, judiciary, politics — they are old minds trying to deal with new problems," she said.

More like old minds who can't get with the program. It's 2013 and we're still having this kind of gender inequality.

Sad day.

I'd say not everyone can be as advanced as those of us in the West, but that would be politically incorrect

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Necroshea wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
For those at work....

"The people who are there in the police, judiciary, politics — they are old minds trying to deal with new problems," she said.

More like old minds who can't get with the program. It's 2013 and we're still having this kind of gender inequality.

Sad day.

I'd say not everyone can be as advanced as those of us in the West, but that would be politically incorrect

Just don't get why everyone doesn't want to be like "Murrca.

Haters gotta hate I guess.

Well, "rape crew" anyone?

Saw this on CBS world news sometime ago.

Their (India's) idea of the crime of rape seems to be vastly different than ours and many other nations. Getting rape seems to be blamed on the woman, most cases are not reported because of the stigma it impacts on victim's life and one man even commited suicidewhen his daughter was rape because it affects the entire family.

A bit disturbing.

Glad there is a small element of people trying to change the culture (for lack of a better term) and trying to bring the scumbags to justice.

 Necroshea wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Necroshea wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
For those at work....

"The people who are there in the police, judiciary, politics — they are old minds trying to deal with new problems," she said.

More like old minds who can't get with the program. It's 2013 and we're still having this kind of gender inequality.

Sad day.

I'd say not everyone can be as advanced as those of us in the West, but that would be politically incorrect

Just don't get why everyone doesn't want to be like "Murrca.

Our record on rape isn't worth boasting about in the west either, in fact it's still pitiful, best not to throw stones when there's still so much glass around. Look at the rape stats, the relevant conviction rates and the numbers of people who still say things like 'she was asking for it dressed like that'.

Only two pages in but so far Dakka has not blamed the victim. /applause

Well what can we blame the victim for? Not dying from the beating before she was violently raped?

 Manchu wrote:
Only two pages in but so far Dakka has not blamed the victim. /applause

Well, to be fair, the lawyer in the article blamed the victim.

Man DakkaDakka talks about rape a lot, would anyone else describe this site as "rapey"?

Just to add to the fun, they disembowled her before chucking her from the bus.

My mum works all over there...

Those guys need to suffer some lead poisoning...

Preferably some .45 caliber lead poisoning amiright

 Grey Templar wrote:
Preferably some .45 caliber lead poisoning amiright

You read my mind!

Don't worry, their lawyer is now saying the police beat them and placed other hostile prisoners in their cell.

 Mr Nobody wrote:
Don't worry, their lawyer is now saying the police beat them and placed other hostile prisoners in their cell.

That's not really far fetched. They probably did get the gak kicked out of them by the cops, which raises my sympathy for them exactly none.
Cause it's not like they were beaten, raped, and thrown in the gutter to die.

 whembly wrote:
My mum works all over there...

Those guys need to suffer some lead poisoning...

Tungsten poisoning, vitamin W as I like to call it

 AustonT wrote:

 Mr Nobody wrote:
Don't worry, their lawyer is now saying the police beat them and placed other hostile prisoners in their cell.

That's not really far fetched. They probably did get the gak kicked out of them by the cops, which raises my sympathy for them exactly none.
Cause it's not like they were beaten, raped, and thrown in the gutter to die.

Actualy, what at least two of them are saying is that they were beaten until they were forced to sign a confession and they were not involved at all... But then why let facts interfear wirh a good witch hunt.

This is one of the major problems with the case. The police are trying to get a conviction but often in india they don't care who is convicted as long as it looks like they have done something. Its easy to pick up someone of a low cast and beat them until they confess, because " they must have done something, .right, because they are low cast".

Wether they are guilty or not police violence brings doubt in to the case. Unfortunatly too many police around the world think that it is a case of "well we arrested them so they MUST be guilty" and too many people agree.

No, but really. They make me ashamed to be the same species. I honestly can't think of much better than living on a different planet to these people.

It's awful this crime. The lawyer must be an idiot. But equally, after thousands of rape cases, even by politicians, the Indian government and people decide that they want to take action? Only after 6 men did such an awful crime? And what about cases in Africa such as the Congo? Does anyone care about the little black girl who got raped by soldiers and has now contracted HIV?

What the Indian people want to happen to the rapists is quite disturbing as well. Let me take a few comments from Yahoo:

They are no different than a pack of rabid wild dogs and need to be put down, any human who commits this type of crime is defective and cannot be fixed. I hear there are many in India who commit rape, weed them out and be done with it or their society will never evolve and become civilized.

Kill them all... slowly and painfully... let them suffer ...

How could anyone think that a 17 year-old who did that should get out after 3 years in a reform facility? Such a person is not reformable.

A better punishment is eat by the tiger.

Google it to see more stuff.

It's awful what some people are suggesting. I don't care about the crime, it's punishment enough when your name is plastered across the headlines of the world.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
It's awful this crime. The lawyer must be an idiot. But equally, after thousands of rape cases, even by politicians, the Indian government and people decide that they want to take action? Only after 6 men did such an awful crime? And what about cases in Africa such as the Congo? Does anyone care about the little black girl who got raped by soldiers and has now contracted HIV?

This is largely due to the old problem of 1 being a person, 1000000 being a statistic. It required one specific case to be picked out and highlighted for people to see it as the crime it is.

And TBH, I don't see the problem with people thinking that such things are just punishments, just so long as no-one ever listens to them. If they think that's what it deserves, who's to stop them from saying so? It's still a million miles away from those punishments happening.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
It's awful what some people are suggesting. I don't care about the crime, it's punishment enough when your name is plastered across the headlines of the world.

Yes, just imagine having to live with the bad press that comes from gang raping women to death.

That's not my point.

Imagine it if everyone knew that you had raped a woman to death. How hard it would be later on in life, should you be fine and not get the death penalty.

Funnily enough, my sympathies are not with such a person.

Mine aren't either. You just can't punish people like that.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
That's not my point.

Imagine it if everyone knew that you had raped a woman to death. How hard it would be later on in life, should you be fine and not get the death penalty.

If someone was guilty of raping a woman to death, I would have no problem with putting them in a position where they didn't have to worry about later life. According to what I've read, the woman in this case literally had her guts hanging out when she was chucked into the street.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
That's not my point.

Imagine it if everyone knew that you had raped a woman to death. How hard it would be later on in life, should you be fine and not get the death penalty.

In India, it doesn't seem to matter. Still, if (as you say) we can't punish people like that, we can execute them and let God pronounce judgement. Even if the athiests are right about the universe, we're still one scumbag less on the world so it's win-win either way.

I'm not sure that you would like it should you have committed such a crime. Anyway, living so close to India, the hatred radiates from the country. They won't live for five seconds after leaving prison.

What is it with the buses in India. Another rape is reported in connection with one:

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/13/16490382-reports-6-held-over-new-india-bus-gang-rape?lite

Steve steveson wrote:

 AustonT wrote:

 Mr Nobody wrote:
Don't worry, their lawyer is now saying the police beat them and placed other hostile prisoners in their cell.

That's not really far fetched. They probably did get the gak kicked out of them by the cops, which raises my sympathy for them exactly none.
Cause it's not like they were beaten, raped, and thrown in the gutter to die.

Actualy, what at least two of them are saying is that they were beaten until they were forced to sign a confession and they were not involved at all... But then why let facts interfear wirh a good witch hunt.

This is one of the major problems with the case. The police are trying to get a conviction but often in india they don't care who is convicted as long as it looks like they have done something. Its easy to pick up someone of a low cast and beat them until they confess, because " they must have done something, .right, because they are low cast".

Wether they are guilty or not police violence brings doubt in to the case. Unfortunatly too many police around the world think that it is a case of "well we arrested them so they MUST be guilty" and too many people agree.

Careful there. OT doesn't like to hear anything not having to do with blindly punishing people.

Steve steveson wrote:

 AustonT wrote:

 Mr Nobody wrote:
Don't worry, their lawyer is now saying the police beat them and placed other hostile prisoners in their cell.

That's not really far fetched. They probably did get the gak kicked out of them by the cops, which raises my sympathy for them exactly none.
Cause it's not like they were beaten, raped, and thrown in the gutter to die.

Actualy, what at least two of them are saying is that they were beaten until they were forced to sign a confession and they were not involved at all... But then why let facts interfear wirh a good witch hunt.

Ahh, so since the same source said the woman is responsible for her rape, then blamed the mail companion are those "facts" too?

Prosecutor Rajiv Mohan said last week that a DNA test confirmed that the blood of the victim matched blood stains found on the clothes of all the accused.

But they SAID they were innocent?!? That means they are, facts. You said so yourself. Let's not let DNA get in the way of facts right? Right.

I am appalled at the individuals in this thread who think a hanging is too good for this scum.

As ugly and just plain fethed up as the defence offered by the defence team was... welcome to the kind of misogyny that exists throughout most of the world, and existed in most the developed world until around a 100 years ago.

There is some real hope that this event could lead to some kind of a seachange in how rape is seen in India. With so many criminal gangs, and with the line between criminal gangs and politicians being so hazy it will likely to take a long time for any legal reform to meaningfully change things on the streets, but at least there's hope it might start moving in the right direction.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I am appalled at the individuals in this thread who think a hanging is too good for this scum.

You are too easy on them, living a life with no hope is a much better punishment. Death is an escape from the hell of an indian prison.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sebster wrote:
As ugly and just plain fethed up as the defence offered by the defence team was... welcome to the kind of misogyny that exists throughout most of the world, and existed in most the developed world not around a 100 years ago.

The US, UK and Ireland use the same sort of defence against rape. All common law courts see that defence (don't know about civil law systems), the only difference is the weight that it carries. 30 years ago in the UK panorama had an exposé of the interview that rape victims had to suffer through. Nobody has an ivory tower to sit in.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
I'm not sure that you would like it should you have committed such a crime.

You know, I don't think I COULD commit such a crime. And folks than can and do, I don't really care what they think of their punishment/sentence.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
I'm not sure that you would like it should you have committed such a crime.

You're not supposed to "like" your punishment, that's the whole fething point!

"Like" being "deserving of some human rights".

It's appalling what some are suggesting.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
"Like" being "deserving of some human rights".

It's appalling what some are suggesting.

Behave like a rabid animal, get treated like one... Yep, seems fair to me.

Does it? Does it really?

So you think that they deserve:
1) Getting castrated
2) Spending a few weeks in the stocks in public, so people can ridicule them (amongst other things)
3) Have a public execution by burning

Is that what you think they deserve

Sure, they raped and killed a person. Why should their punishment be less worse than what they did to the victim?

They didn't burn the victim, did they?

I would say it is equivilent to disembowelment.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I would say it is equivilent to disembowelment.

Drawn and quarter'ed too. Go medieval...

I don't see much of a point in torturing someone who committed such a heinous crime. It doesn't solve the problem that the crime already happened, and it degrades the people actually committing the torture. I think life in a maximum security prison with no opportunity for parole would be more effective in this case, as:

a) Rapists are generally treated horrifically in prisons;
b) They have to go through horribly dehumanizing things every day for the rest of their lives;
c) (for those requiring some form of harsh punitive treatment) They are quite likely to suffer the same treatment in jail that they gave this woman.

That's just my opinion though.

I suppose that, unlike in our country, these guys wouldn't have proper medical attention, recreational facilities, guards that won't beat them up, private sleeping quarters, etc...

But I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that there is the same stigma associated with Rape that there is over here. Given that their culture at large doesn't treat rape as seriously as we do over here I doubt the criminal elements will treat it any differently.

I could be wrong but I wouldn't make that assumption.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
"Like" being "deserving of some human rights".

It's appalling what some are suggesting.

As appalling as committing a morally reprehensible act?

Sure, due process and laws of the land judge not lest ye be oxen (or something) etc, etc, etc.

Sure, give them due process. In the event of a Guilty verdict, nasty nasty things await.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I suppose that, unlike in our country, these guys wouldn't have proper medical attention, recreational facilities, guards that won't beat them up, private sleeping quarters, etc...

But I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that there is the same stigma associated with Rape that there is over here. Given that their culture at large doesn't treat rape as seriously as we do over here I doubt the criminal elements will treat it any differently.

I could be wrong but I wouldn't make that assumption.

Fair point. I still imagine that the conditions in a prison would regardless be pretty horrible, rape stigma or no.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I suppose that, unlike in our country, these guys wouldn't have proper medical attention, recreational facilities, guards that won't beat them up, private sleeping quarters, etc...

But I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that there is the same stigma associated with Rape that there is over here. Given that their culture at large doesn't treat rape as seriously as we do over here I doubt the criminal elements will treat it any differently.

I could be wrong but I wouldn't make that assumption.

I think the unwritten code of conduct would put the Indian rapists at risk. Doesn't matter where in the world. rape is morally abhorent. if anything it is s sign of weakness. And prison populations sniff out weakness like sharks do blood.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
Does it? Does it really?

So you think that they deserve:
1) Getting castrated
2) Spending a few weeks in the stocks in public, so people can ridicule them (amongst other things)
3) Have a public execution by burning

Is that what you think they deserve

Yes, I think that they deserve all of those things.

They've beaten, raped, disembowelled and left a young women to die in the side of the road, some even say that they backed up the bus to run her over afterwards. If they are found guilty, which at this point seems likely considering that they have actual physical evidence on themselves and their defence seems to consist of "she was asking for it by behaving like a slut", then they deserve to die in the most brutally painful form known to man.

Let me stress this again for those in the cheap seats: they raped and murdered a young women in an extremely cruel and sadistic way for their ENTERTAINMENT! I'm sorry if that may shock some of you, but I don't consider "people" capable of doing such a thing as a fellow human being.

I pretty much agree with grayshadow87 regarding the "degrading of people", except that instead of lifelong imprisonment I'd give them a nice sunny wall to lean against and a cigarette.
These folks have (in the event of a guilty verdict) proven themselves to be at about the same level as rabid dogs, and should be put down in the same manner.
Ni vindictiveness, just put them down. Yes, the 17-year old as well.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I am appalled at the individuals in this thread who think a hanging is too good for this scum.

You are too easy on them, living a life with no hope is a much better punishment. Death is an escape from the hell of an indian prison.

Sure, but last I checked there's never been a repeat offender from a noose. If you stream line the process unlike how we work it in the United States it's also cheaper. A win/win for society as a dangerous element is permanently removed, and they don't have to pay for a lifetime of shelter and feeding for said element.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
Does it? Does it really?

So you think that they deserve:
1) Getting castrated
2) Spending a few weeks in the stocks in public, so people can ridicule them (amongst other things)
3) Have a public execution by burning

Is that what you think they deserve

Think with your dick, lose it. The first has a certain appeal indeed, and I've long advocated it for pedophiles. Being mocked by society isn't really that bad a punishment and the least of what they deserve. A burning would suck, but then I support the more merciful and ecofriendly hanging.

PhantomViper wrote:

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
Does it? Does it really?

So you think that they deserve:
1) Getting castrated
2) Spending a few weeks in the stocks in public, so people can ridicule them (amongst other things)
3) Have a public execution by burning

Is that what you think they deserve

Yes, I think that they deserve all of those things.

They've beaten, raped, disembowelled and left a young women to die in the side of the road, some even say that they backed up the bus to run her over afterwards. If they are found guilty, which at this point seems likely considering that they have actual physical evidence on themselves and their defence seems to consist of "she was asking for it by behaving like a slut", then they deserve to die in the most brutally painful form known to man.

Let me stress this again for those in the cheap seats: they raped and murdered a young women in an extremely cruel and sadistic way for their ENTERTAINMENT! I'm sorry if that may shock some of you, but I don't consider "people" capable of doing such a thing as a fellow human being.

Exalted, their kind can gtfo from my species.

 grayshadow87 wrote:
I don't see much of a point in torturing someone who committed such a heinous crime. It doesn't solve the problem that the crime already happened, and it degrades the people actually committing the torture. I think life in a maximum security prison with no opportunity for parole would be more effective in this case, as:

a) Rapists are generally treated horrifically in prisons;
b) They have to go through horribly dehumanizing things every day for the rest of their lives;
c) (for those requiring some form of harsh punitive treatment) They are quite likely to suffer the same treatment in jail that they gave this woman.

That's just my opinion though.

My take on what you typed isthat you are for torture and sadistic treatment at the hands of other convicts, but by not having the punishment dealt out by agents of the government you absolve yourself of any associated guilt. You seem fine with the knowledge you would be condemning them to 'horribly dehumanizing things every day for the rest of their lives.'

I guess my take is if you are against 'horribly dehumanizing things' being done to prisoners by the gov't, you should be against those things being done by ANYONE, and be willing to commit the resources needed to not having the prison system be that way.

Personally I don't think prison should be pleasant, but I do think it should be safe. We are not supposed to be inflicting multiple years of gang rape and beatings. The punishment we are supposed to be inflicting is loss of freedom and some other civil rights (in the US you can lose the right to vote for example).

I'm all for kill or castrate and be done with it, but some of you folks advocating torture have some serious problems.

maybe we can compromise. No sedation during the procedure

 Grey Templar wrote:
Sure, they raped and killed a person. Why should their punishment be less worse than what they did to the victim?

Somehow I doubt, if the decision to commit a crime is calculated, that the severity of the punishment relative to the severity of the crime is considered.

I'll admit that in my anger, I'll advocate the most brutal punishments I can come up with for rapists. Of course, I'm also not a judge, and I'd be kicked off any jury involved in a rape case, so I'll never be the one in a position to impose that punishment.

But then, I knew a girl who was raped. One day she's bright and happy and fun... and the next she's dead inside. It's the most horrific thing I've ever seen. Part of me wishes I could get my hands on the guy who did it for just a couple minutes... and the rest of me is glad that I've never had the opportunity to do so. I'm not certain I like the part of me that could hate someone enough to inflict that much pain on another living thing.

I'm serious. Unles you've seen the 'before' and 'after' for yourself, you have no idea what being raped does to a person. Even just seeing the 'after' doesn't show the full tragedy of rape.

If we want a serious yet civilized punishment for rape, I'm all for firing squad - or even automated machine gun, if you're worried about dehumanizing the shooters. 100% effective in preventing him from raping again.

 dogma wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Sure, they raped and killed a person. Why should their punishment be less worse than what they did to the victim?

Somehow I doubt, if the decision to commit a crime is calculated, that the severity of the punishment relative to the severity of the crime is considered.

If we lost all laws we would see the difference between having punishment vs no punishment.

The punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime.

No deterrent is 100% effective, but they do work.

 Grey Templar wrote:

If we lost all laws we would see the difference between having punishment vs no punishment.

The punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime.

No deterrent is 100% effective, but they do work.

Right, but this isn't a debate about the presence of absence of punishment. This is a debate about why punishment should be adjusted to the crime, and how it should be done.

I agree that punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime, largely due to considerations of utility*, but the infliction of equivalent suffering is nothing more than a mixture of schadenfreude and sadism.


*The punishment must, on average, outweigh the utility of the crime.

Sadsim? I'd hardly call it that. Sadisim is getting enjoyment from the infliction of pain on others. I might gain some satisfaction in knowing the criminal got his just reward but I'm not saying they should be tortured for the hell of it. They commited a crime and should recieve an appropriate punishment. Anything which is less suffering than their victim endured is not only wrong, its insulting to the dignity of the victim. It tells them that society really doesn't care about what happened to them.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I am appalled at the individuals in this thread who think a hanging is too good for this scum.

You are too easy on them, living a life with no hope is a much better punishment. Death is an escape from the hell of an indian prison.

Sure, but last I checked there's never been a repeat offender from a noose. If you stream line the process unlike how we work it in the United States it's also cheaper. A win/win for society as a dangerous element is permanently removed, and they don't have to pay for a lifetime of shelter and feeding for said element.

Inappropriate comment removed.
Reds8n


If you want to have due process you can't just kill them after the trial ends, that is how you kill the wrong people and I wouldn't be too surprised if there is one of the group that just watched and egged his friends on. While he deserves a harsh punishment does he deserve to die? The numbers of miscarriages of justice that happen in countries like India are a not negligible amount. There have been numerous cases of people being sentenced incorrectly and being released afterwards.

If you want to have due process and ensure that you're not putting the wrong person to death you have to wait ages to do it. Even when the case look dodgy and there was no way the person would be tried like an adult anywhere but texas it still takes 10 years to put someone to death. Death penalty costs so much more than life cos of the extra protection and treatment. So you fail on that.

There are numerous crimes that certain countries see as being as bad as rape: Uganda has some interesting ideas about homosexuality, Nigeria has - honest to god - witch trials. Etc etc
The taking of a life by the state devalues the meaning of life and fundamentally disagrees with the basic tenants that exist within any legal system, that someone can be redeemed. The a person can better themselves. If we truly think that anyone that murdered, raped or whatever deserves to die for it then society has taken a step back. Society doesn't work on the basis of wanting to be good for the sake of it, it is once again back to being good or we'll get you. It increases the force used by the state in every day life and no longer is it the soft threat of retribution it's the hard threat of death. Obey our society or die.
You may think that it's not an issue we live in democracies, look how quickly democracies decided to bring back internment and torture to deal with terrorism. If you really think that a democracy cannot do wrong you're misguided. All you need is one unjust law, a defendent who cannot meet the burden of proof required to exonerate or just happens to be a muslim accused of terrorism in the wrong part of the world and you will see an innocent death.

Well, I do not know much of New Dehli Culture. I know here this would be considered a reprehensible defense no lawyer would consider.
But may the idea then he even considered using it shows that they could possibly buy it.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I am appalled at the individuals in this thread who think a hanging is too good for this scum.

You are too easy on them, living a life with no hope is a much better punishment. Death is an escape from the hell of an indian prison.

Sure, but last I checked there's never been a repeat offender from a noose. If you stream line the process unlike how we work it in the United States it's also cheaper. A win/win for society as a dangerous element is permanently removed, and they don't have to pay for a lifetime of shelter and feeding for said element.

. If you want to have due process you can't just kill them after the trial ends, that is how you kill the wrong people and I wouldn't be too surprised if there is one of the group that just watched and egged his friends on. While he deserves a harsh punishment does he deserve to die? The numbers of miscarriages of justice that happen in countries like India are a not negligible amount. There have been numerous cases of people being sentenced incorrectly and being released afterwards.

If you want to have due process and ensure that you're not putting the wrong person to death you have to wait ages to do it. Even when the case look dodgy and there was no way the person would be tried like an adult anywhere but texas it still takes 10 years to put someone to death. Death penalty costs so much more than life cos of the extra protection and treatment. So you fail on that.

There are numerous crimes that certain countries see as being as bad as rape: Uganda has some interesting ideas about homosexuality, Nigeria has - honest to god - witch trials. Etc etc
The taking of a life by the state devalues the meaning of life and fundamentally disagrees with the basic tenants that exist within any legal system, that someone can be redeemed. The a person can better themselves. If we truly think that anyone that murdered, raped or whatever deserves to die for it then society has taken a step back. Society doesn't work on the basis of wanting to be good for the sake of it, it is once again back to being good or we'll get you. It increases the force used by the state in every day life and no longer is it the soft threat of retribution it's the hard threat of death. Obey our society or die.
You may think that it's not an issue we live in democracies, look how quickly democracies decided to bring back internment and torture to deal with terrorism. If you really think that a democracy cannot do wrong you're misguided. All you need is one unjust law, a defendent who cannot meet the burden of proof required to exonerate or just happens to be a muslim accused of terrorism in the wrong part of the world and you will see an innocent death.

While I agree that legality doesn't necessarily make things morally right, someone who stood by and watched someone get brutally raped or even encouraged it should get just as harsh a penalty as the people who did it.

Godwin incoming!

Treating people like Untetmenschen that don't deserve to live? Yeah, excellent plan! Suppose it turns out, however unlikely, that they were innocent? Then what??

Seriously, we have enough primal urges fething up society; be the better man.

Then we say sorry and let them go...
I oppose the death penalty only because it's nearly impossible to be 100% sure of guilt.
If there is ever a method where we can find out if someone is guilty to that degree of accuracy I'd be all for it.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Sadsim? I'd hardly call it that. Sadisim is getting enjoyment from the infliction of pain on others. I might gain some satisfaction in knowing the criminal got his just reward but I'm not saying they should be tortured for the hell of it. They commited a crime and should recieve an appropriate punishment.

If you derive satisfaction from criminal being justly punished, and that punishment entails suffering, you also derive satisfaction from the suffering of others. And it is very difficult to claim that satisfaction does not entail a pleasure response.

 Grey Templar wrote:

Anything which is less suffering than their victim endured is not only wrong, its insulting to the dignity of the victim. It tells them that society really doesn't care about what happened to them.

How do you quantify suffering? And, more importantly, who determines what level of suffering is equivalent?

Also, why is the victim relevant to the punishment applied?

 purplefood wrote:
Then we say sorry and let them go...
I oppose the death penalty only because it's nearly impossible to be 100% sure of guilt.
If there is ever a method where we can find out if someone is guilty to that degree of accuracy I'd be all for it.

DNA evidence is pretty damning these days.

I'm going to butcher a quote from a judge from the America west that I've always liked.

"We didn't hang more then a few we should have, and they probably deserved it jest on principle"

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Godwin incoming!

Treating people like Untetmenschen that don't deserve to live? Yeah, excellent plan! Suppose it turns out, however unlikely, that they were innocent? Then what??

Seriously, we have enough primal urges fething up society; be the better man.

Pay their family weregild and move on for the old Germanic interpretation since you have to jump straight to Godwin.

You'd be hard pressed to convince me that murderers, rapists, pedophiles and the like /aren't/ sub-humans who deserve to be purged. Why feed and clothe them and let them live comfortably? To rehabilitate them? Right. That happens in the same fairy tail land that the Cheshire Cat wanders about in. It's no different then putting a bullet in the head of a rabid dog. Nor is it any more primal then taking a drink of water. If man is an animal and some sicknesses cannot be cured, you do what you must to remove the threat to the healthy and productive members of society. Justice is served, society is protected.

I'm not saying due process should be ignored. Absolutely not in cases of murder and rape it is all the more important, but when the time comes to serve sentence on the worst of us nothing is gained as species by showing these backsteps in humanity mercy. Then again I'm the type of person who'd like to see lashes in the public square come back for DUI. So take this as you will.

I'll save you bleeding hearts an image look up for your response.



Have you considered maybe your heart should bleed for the victims instead of those who did such harm?

 dogma wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

If we lost all laws we would see the difference between having punishment vs no punishment.

The punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime.

No deterrent is 100% effective, but they do work.

Right, but this isn't a debate about the presence of absence of punishment. This is a debate about why punishment should be adjusted to the crime, and how it should be done.

I agree that punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime, largely due to considerations of utility*, but the infliction of equivalent suffering is nothing more than a mixture of schadenfreude and sadism.


*The punishment must, on average, outweigh the utility of the crime.

Why not rehabilitation?

 Cheesecat wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

If we lost all laws we would see the difference between having punishment vs no punishment.

The punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime.

No deterrent is 100% effective, but they do work.

Right, but this isn't a debate about the presence of absence of punishment. This is a debate about why punishment should be adjusted to the crime, and how it should be done.

I agree that punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime, largely due to considerations of utility*, but the infliction of equivalent suffering is nothing more than a mixture of schadenfreude and sadism.


*The punishment must, on average, outweigh the utility of the crime.

Why not rehabilitation?

Do you believe that's possible?

 whembly wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

If we lost all laws we would see the difference between having punishment vs no punishment.

The punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime.

No deterrent is 100% effective, but they do work.

Right, but this isn't a debate about the presence of absence of punishment. This is a debate about why punishment should be adjusted to the crime, and how it should be done.

I agree that punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime, largely due to considerations of utility*, but the infliction of equivalent suffering is nothing more than a mixture of schadenfreude and sadism.


*The punishment must, on average, outweigh the utility of the crime.

Why not rehabilitation?

Do you believe that's possible?

For certain crimes, yes.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

If we lost all laws we would see the difference between having punishment vs no punishment.

The punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime.

No deterrent is 100% effective, but they do work.

Right, but this isn't a debate about the presence of absence of punishment. This is a debate about why punishment should be adjusted to the crime, and how it should be done.

I agree that punishment needs to be adjusted to the crime, largely due to considerations of utility*, but the infliction of equivalent suffering is nothing more than a mixture of schadenfreude and sadism.


*The punishment must, on average, outweigh the utility of the crime.

Why not rehabilitation?

Do you believe that's possible?

For certain crimes, yes.

But, not in this case...right?

You might be able to rehabilitate a thief or drug addict... but murderers, rapists, etc have crossed a line.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
They didn't burn the victim, did they?

They disembowled her before throwing her from the bus.

Well rehab seems to work for Norway even with serial killers.

http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/3950
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2000920,00.html

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Seriously, we have enough primal urges fething up society; be the better man.

1.you are a sexist pig, women have primal urges too.
2. Primal urges like beating a couple with an iron pipe, raping the woman, and dumping both naked in the street? Yeah they are in fact subhuman.

My opinion is that anyone guilty of the crimes these people are accused of committing need to be put down. It's not for revenge, but to eliminate any chance they have of doing this to someone else.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
You might be able to rehabilitate a thief or drug addict... but murderers, rapists, etc have crossed a line.

So we will go after Nelson Mandella for being a murderer?
He never rehabilitated into a man that was above violence? Every freedom fighter turned politician? The founders of Irish, French, American, Turkish, etc etc democracy were all beyond being able to stop killing people?
Anyone can change and anyone can kill in the right circumstances. The whole idea of rehabilitation is worthless if you say that someone is irredeemable.

Relapse wrote:
My opinion is that anyone guilty of the crimes these people are accused of committing need to be put down. It's not for revenge, but to eliminate any chance they have of doing this to someone else.

You know 6 foot of concrete between you and the outside world is as good a preventative? Once you move beyond just preventing them re-entering society then you are talking about revenge and not the protection of society.

"An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind."

-Mahatma Gandhi

Yeah, but the way I see it is that the difference between life in a 10x10 concrete cage and death of some form are roughly equivilent, and since one costs the tax payer more than the other I think it would be prudent to save money. Society has already been sufficiently harmed by these people in question, so why should we spend more money than we have to?

All of this after we have throughly given the criminals due process of course. I'd say having blood stained clothing and a defense that is clearly an admission of guilt we would all be squared away in that department.


Maybe the idea that Death is the worse sentance over life in prison is part of the problem here. What if we switched those around. I know if I had the choice I'd probably take death in 5 years from this date to over 40+ years behind bars to die of natural causes.

Lets cut down the number of Lifers to the number on Death Row and have those on Death Row become Lifers.

But it doesn't save money. The cost of bringing someone through the process of death penalty in america is so much more than holding someone in gen pop, that it is the same.
You have so many more appeals and court costs, the segregated cells in the max security prisons, the greater supervision as they may top themselves, the fact that they cannot work off the cost of their incarceration in prison work programs. And there is the cost of the execution itself.

If you are talking economy you have gotten a false one right there.

Which also needs fixing. limit on number of appeals and a shorter time till the fullfilment of the sentence. Or maybe an unlimited number of appeals, but the appeal doesn't reset the timer on the sentence.

So the defense has say 5 years max to gather new evidence after the initial trial.

Or appeal system really is screwed up. It needs streamlining. And with new methods of evidence gathering we really don't have any excuse for appeal after appeal when the original trial would have had the freshest evidence.


Its not like it was 20 years ago. Forensics is so advanced that we can get almost pinpoint details. We won't have exonerations 20 years after the fact anymore.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Yeah, but the way I see it is that the difference between life in a 10x10 concrete cage and death of some form are roughly equivilent, and since one costs the tax payer more than the other I think it would be prudent to save money. Society has already been sufficiently harmed by these people in question, so why should we spend more money than we have to?

All of this after we have throughly given the criminals due process of course. I'd say having blood stained clothing and a defense that is clearly an admission of guilt we would all be squared away in that department.


Maybe the idea that Death is the worse sentance over life in prison is part of the problem here. What if we switched those around. I know if I had the choice I'd probably take death in 5 years from this date to over 40+ years behind bars to die of natural causes.

Lets cut down the number of Lifers to the number on Death Row and have those on Death Row become Lifers.

Except it's actually cheaper to keep criminals behind bars then to be on death row because death-row inmates are afforded a much more expensive trial, and multiple appeals .See, no one on a jury wants to be responsible for putting an innocent man to death, so the attorneys in those

cases get more expensive expert witnesses, and more lawyers are needed in general to prove absolutely the defendant's guilt. And when death-row inmates whine about "possible new evidence" and "DNA testing" and "It has been 100 percent proven that I am innocent 20 years after my

conviction," the appeals process inflates the bill by millions of dollars. As a society, it's the type of thing you can't let yourself get wrong.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/us/25death.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all&

 Grey Templar wrote:
Which also needs fixing. limit on number of appeals and a shorter time till the fullfilment of the sentence. Or maybe an unlimited number of appeals, but the appeal doesn't reset the timer on the sentence.

So the defense has say 5 years max to gather new evidence after the initial trial.

Or appeal system really is screwed up. It needs streamlining. And with new methods of evidence gathering we really don't have any excuse for appeal after appeal when the original trial would have had the freshest evidence.


Its not like it was 20 years ago. Forensics is so advanced that we can get almost pinpoint details. We won't have exonerations 20 years after the fact anymore.

We will have exonerations 20 years from now I guarantee it.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

Relapse wrote:
My opinion is that anyone guilty of the crimes these people are accused of committing need to be put down. It's not for revenge, but to eliminate any chance they have of doing this to someone else.

You know 6 foot of concrete between you and the outside world is as good a preventative? Once you move beyond just preventing them re-entering society then you are talking about revenge and not the protection of society.

It would be nice if they stayed inside that 6' of concrete, but a lot don't and they kill more people. This from a website citing instances:


http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html

A SHORT LIST OF MURDERERS RELEASED TO MURDER AGAIN

This is just a short list I compiled when I set out to find people who were already convicted of murder and afterwards committed murder again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John McRae -- Michigan/Florida. Life for murder of 8-year-old boy. Pedophile. Paroled 1971. Convicted of another murder of a boy after parole, in Michigan 1998. Charges pending on 2 other counts in Florida.
---------------------------------------
John Miller -- California. Killed an infant 1957, convicted of murder, 1958. Paroled 1975. Killed his parents 1975. Life term 1975.
---------------------------------------
Michael Lawrence -- Florida. Killed robbery victim. Life term, 1976. Paroled 1985. Killed robbery victim. Condemned 1990.
---------------------------------------
Donald Dillbeck -- Florida. Killed policeman in 1979. Escaped from prison in 1990, kidnapped and killed female motorist after escape. Condemned 1991.
---------------------------------------
Edward Kennedy -- Florida. Killed motel clerk. Sentenced to Life. Escaped 1981. Killed policeman and male civilian after prison break. Executed 1992.
---------------------------------------
Dawud Mu'Min -- Virginia. Killed cab driver in holdup. Sentenced 1973. Escaped 1988. Raped/killed woman 1988. Condemned 1989. Executed 1997.
---------------------------------------
Viva Nash -- Utah/Arizona. Two terms of life for murder in Utah, 1978. Escaped in 1982. Murdered again. Condemned in Arizona, 1983.
---------------------------------------
Randy Greenawalt -- Escaped from Prison in 1978, while serving a life sentence for a 1974 murder. He then murdered a family of 4 people, shotgunning them to death, including a toddler.
---------------------------------------
Norman Parker -- Florida/D.C. Life term in Florida for murder, 1966. Escaped 1978. Life on another count of murder in 1979.
---------------------------------------
Winford Stokes -- Missouri. Ruled insane on two counts of murder 1969. Escaped from asylum, 1978. Murdered again. Executed for this murder, 1990.
---------------------------------------
Charles Crawford -- Missouri. Life term in 1965 for murder. Paroled 1990. Convicted of murder again in 1994.
---------------------------------------
Jack Ferrell -- Florida. Committed Murdered 1981. 15 years to life, 1982. Paroled 1987. Murdered again 1992. Condemned 1993.
---------------------------------------
Timothy Buss -- Murdered five-year-old girl. Sentenced to 25 years in 1981. Paroled 1993. Murdered 10-year-old boy. Condemned 1996.
---------------------------------------
Martsay Bolder -- Missouri. Serving a sentence of life for first-degree murder in 1973. Murdered prison cellmate 1979.
---------------------------------------
Henry Brisbon, Illinois. Murdered 2 in robbery. Sentenced to 1000- 3000 years. Killed inmate in prison 1982. Sentenced to DP. Commuted by Governor Ryan.
---------------------------------------
Randolph Dial -- Oklahoma. Life for murder 1986. Escaped from prison with deputy warden's wife as kidnap victim. 1989. Still at large. Warden's wife never found.
---------------------------------------
Arthur J. Bomar, Jr. -- released from prison in Nevada on parole in 1990. Bomar had served 11 years of a murder sentence for killing a man over an argument about a parking space. Six years later in Pennsylvania, Bomar brutally kidnapped, raped and murdered George Mason University star athlete Aimee Willard.
---------------------------------------
Dwain Little -- Oregon. Raped/Stabbed 16-year-old girl. Life term 1966. Paroled 1974. Returned as Parole Violator 1975. Again Released 1977. Then shot family of 4. Three consecutive life terms for rape and murder 1980.
---------------------------------------
Arthur Shawcross (The 'Monster of the Rivers') -- Released after serving a 25 year sentence for a child murder, turned to murdering prostitutes. At least 10 in all. Now serving ten consecutive sentences of 25 years to life - 250 years in all.
---------------------------------------
Samuel D. Smith -- in prison for murdering Zita Casey, 79, during a burglary in St. Louis in 1978. While in prison he murdered another inmate, Marlin May, during a knife fight in 1987 in prison.
---------------------------------------
Darrell P. Pandeli -- After being released from prison after a conviction for murder, Pandeli murdered a prostitute, cut off her nipples and flushed them down the toilet. Now on DR in Arizona for that second recidivist murder.
---------------------------------------
Chad Allen Lee -- Convicted of capital murder. Sentenced to other than death. Released and went on murder spree. Murdering Linda Reynolds, a pizza delivery person, and 9 days later robbed and murdered David Lacey, a taxi cab driver. Lee then robbed a mini-market 7 days after than. Shooting the owner, Harold Drury, multiple times without reason.
---------------------------------------
Scott Lehr -- Convicted of capital murder. Sentenced to other than death. Later released. After release, between Feb 91 and Feb 92 lured 10 different female victims, between the ages of 10 and 48-years-old, into his car. Raping and beating them unconscious, stripped and adandoned them in the desert. Three of his victims died in those acts.
---------------------------------------
James Erin McKinney -- Convicted of capital murder. Sentenced to other than death. Later released. Then murdered Christine Mertens in a home invasion robbery. Later murdered James McClain in another separate home invasion robbery.
---------------------------------------
Michael Murdaugh -- Convicted of capital murder. Sentenced to other than death. Later released. After release murdered David Reynolds. Beating him to death. When 'dumping' the body, Murdaugh severed Reynold's head and hands, pulled out his teeth, and buried the body parts.
---------------------------------------
Charles Daniels -- was convicted and sentenced to Life for the 1965 rape and murder of a Louisiana woman. Later having his sentence commuted, he was release. And he again killed another woman, 32-year-old Debbie Tatum.
---------------------------------------
Jarmarr Arnold -- who, while on DR, murdered another DR inmate by stabbing him in the forehead with a sharpen spike. Proving that not even a death sentence can prevent murder until the sentence is carried out.
---------------------------------------
Robert Lee Massie -- Sentenced to the DP, but overturned by Furman, which resulted in him committing further new murders.
---------------------------------------
Kenneth McDuff - Sentenced to the DP, but overturned by Furman. Subsequently released, and murdered as many as 19 young women after his release. Finally executed in 1998 for the murder of Melissa Ann Northrup see ... Who once remarked "Killing a woman is like killing a chicken. They both squawk."
---------------------------------------
Darryl Kemp -- Sentenced to the DP, but overturned by Furman. Subsequently released. Authorities now say he raped and strangled a woman jogging, less than 4 months later.
---------------------------------------
Timothy Hancock -- Serving a life sentence for a murder he committed in 1990, murdered his cellmate, Jason Wagner, in November 2000, while serving his life sentence.
---------------------------------------
Howard Allen -- murdered an elderly woman.. Opal Cooper, in Aug 1974, and was sentenced to 21 years in prison. By January 1985, less than ten years after being incarcerated, Howard Allen was released. On May 20, 1987 Howard Allen broke into the home of eighty-seven year old Laverne Hale, and savagely beat her to death. Six weeks later Allen struck again. On July 13, 1987 Howard Allen knocked on the door of Ernestine Griffin. At lunchtime the following day she was found murdered. On June 11, 1988 Allen was found guilty was found guilty of Ernestine’s murder.
---------------------------------------
Melvin Geary -- originally sentenced to L wop, for the stabbing death of a woman in 1973 with a boning knife. Changed to Life.. released... After his release, Geary was subsequently convicted of murdering 71-year-old Edward Colvin of Sparks, again with a boning knife after Colvin took him in.
---------------------------------------
William Coday Jr. -- convicted of murdering 19-year-old Lisa Hullinger in September 1978. After spending just 15 months in a German prison, he was released. In April 2002, he was convicted of having murdered Gloria Gomez on 13 July, 1997.
---------------------------------------
Corey R. Barton -- In 1983 he murdered 16-year-old Shari-Ann Merton. He received 18 years in prison. He was released after serving 9 years and 8 months. In November 1998, he murdered 27 year-old Sally Harris of North Carolina.
---------------------------------------
Cuhuatemoc Hinricky Peraita -- Rainbow City, Alabama, who was serving life without parole for 3 murders in Gadsden, Alabama was found guilty of capital murder for murdering a fellow inmate.
---------------------------------------
James Prestridge -- Sentenced to L wop, for murdering Esfandiar Ateighechi, as he begged for his life in 1989. Escaped from prison along with John Doran. After their escape Prestridge murdered his fellow-escapee John Doran, shooting him in the back of the head.
---------------------------------------
Jimmy Lee Gray -- who was free on parole from an Arizona conviction for killing a 16-year-old high school girl, kidnapped, sodomized, and suffocated a three-year-old Mississippi girl.
---------------------------------------
Jack Henry Abbott, who had murdered a fellow prison inmate, was released early from a Utah prison. On July 18, 1981, six-weeks after his release, Abbott stabbed actor Richard Adan to death in New York.
---------------------------------------
Benny Lee Chaffin, on December 7, 1984 kidnapped, raped, and murdered a 9-year-old Springfield, Oregon girl. He had been convicted of murder once before in Texas, but not executed.
---------------------------------------
Thomas Eugene Creech, who had been convicted of three murders and had claimed a role in more than 40 killings in 13 states as a paid killer for a motorcycle gang, killed a fellow prison inmate in 1981 and was sentenced to death.
---------------------------------------
Wayne Henry Garrison, 42, was convicted of 1st-degree murder in the death of Justin Wiles 13, of Tulsa. As a teenager, Garrison had killed two children in Tulsa. Police earlier said the circumstances of those killings were similar to Justin's death.
---------------------------------------
Tommy Arthur -- sentenced to die in Alabama's electric chair for killing Troy Wicker in a 1982 murder for-hire scheme in Muscle Shoals. Arthur had already been convicted in 1977 of killing the sister of his common-law wife. He had been sentenced to life for that murder.
---------------------------------------
Robert Lynn Pruett -- a convicted killer already serving a life sentence, fatally stabbed prison guard Daniel Nagle with a sharpened rod while patrolling the Texas Department of Criminal Justice McConnell Unit near Beeville in South Texas. It was the first fatal attack on a Texas corrections officer since guard Minnie Houston was stabbed to death in 1984 by an inmate at the Ellis Unit near Huntsville, a prison official said.
---------------------------------------
Miguel Salas Rodriguez -- charged in the murder of a sheriff's deputy. Sgt. David M. Furrh, 40, in Dec 2000. Rodriguez had a December 1973 conviction of homicide without malice, for which he was sentenced to five years in prison. And yet ANOTHER conviction for murder in April 1979, for which he was sentenced to 70 years in prison. Rodriguez was paroled in October 1989.
---------------------------------------
Bennie Demps --condemned to the DP for the 1976 murder of Alfred Sturgis, a prison snitch. Originally, Demps was sent to death row for the murders of R.N. Brinkworth and Celia Puhlick, who were fatally shot in a Lake County citrus grove. A year after Demps was sent to death row, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out capital punishment across the country, ruling death sentences had been imposed in an arbitrary way. Another failure of the Furman-commuted murderers.
---------------------------------------
Leroy Schmitz -- convicted of strangling his live-in girlfriend in 1986, during an argument. He was sentenced to 18-20 years for that homicide. He was later convicted of murdering his wife, in Whitefish, Montana in 1999.
---------------------------------------
Vernon Sattiewhite -- In 1977, Sattiewhite had been sentenced to five years for a murder but was paroled two years later and granted clemency. In 1984, he was convicted of robbery and sentenced to two years in prison but was paroled after less than six months. Soon after he murdered his ex-girlfriend, Sandra Sorrell.
---------------------------------------
Tomas G. Ervin -- Sentenced to death in 1990, after conviction of the December 1988 murders of Mildred L. Hodges, 75, and her son, Richard E. Hodges. Bert Hunter, who was arrested along with Ervin pleaded guilty to the first-degree murder charges. Hunter and Ervin had met in the Missouri State Penitentiary, where they were both serving life sentences for previous murders.
---------------------------------------
William Michael "Billy the Kid" Mason -- killed his wife three weeks after he was paroled on another murder conviction.
---------------------------------------
Daniel Joe Hittle -- convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death for murdering a police officer Hittle, 40, was described by witnesses as a man who gleefully killed or tortured animals and who routinely beat women and children. He was on parole for the killings of his adoptive parents in Minnesota when he shot Garland police officer Gerald Walker during a traffic stop. Hittle then sped to East Dallas, where he fatally shot Mary Alice Goss, 39; Richard Joseph Cook Jr., 36; Raymond Scott Gregg, 19; and Goss' 4-year-old daughter Christy Condon.
---------------------------------------
Tony Walker -- Texas. Convicted of murder in 1978. Sentenced to 5 years. Murdered a 66 year-old woman and her 81 year-old husband in 1992. Jerome Butler -- Found guilty of the shooting of cab driver Nathan Oakley, 67. Oakley had been a Houston cab driver for 30 years. Butler had an extensive criminal history, including a 1959 conviction on two counts of robbery and assault in New York City. Butler had previously served about 10 years of a 30-year sentence after pleading guilty to the murder of A.C. Johnson, 69.
---------------------------------------
Dalton Prejean -- killed a taxi driver when he was 14, . When he was 17, he gunned down a state trooper in Lafayette, Louisiana. Despite protests from the American Civil Liberties Union and other abolitionist groups, Prejean was executed for the second murder on May 18, 1990.
---------------------------------------
Phillip Jablonski -- Carol Spadoni married Jablonski on June 16, 1982, while he was serving a prison sentence for the 1979 murder of his third wife, Melinda Kimball. After she became his pen-pal correspondent in prison. Jablonski murdered his prison pen-pal wife and her mother. And the day before those murders he had murdered Fathyma Vann, 38, in Indio, about 25 miles from Palm Springs, Vann was found shot and sexually mutilated in the desert with ``I love Jesus'' carved in her back." Now GET THIS -- See... It seems that Phillip Jablonski, now in prison after ALL those murders, placed an ad for a pen-pal -- "Jewish Death Row inmate, white, 51 years old, seeking understanding and open female or male for honest correspondence. Amateur poet, artist. Will answer all correspondence received. PHILLIP JABLONSKI, C-02477/SE95, San Quentin, CA 94974"
---------------------------------------
Jerry Michael Ward -- Originally sentenced to die in the electric chair, for committing murder with malice in the rape and murder of a Houston school girl. His sentence was commuted to life in prison when the U.S. Supreme Court abolished the death penalty in 1972. Although the death penalty was reinstated, the sentence was not. He was subsequently paroled in 1984 after serving 18 years in prison. He was the number one suspect in two new cases, involving the the disappearance of Connie Sue Cooke, and the murder of Brenda Maureen Hackett. But althought police were on the verge of arresting him, Ward committed suicide in a self-inflicted execution.
---------------------------------------
David E. Maust -- Hammond, Illinois. Murdered a 15-year-old boy in 1981. After released murdered three teenage boys, in circumstances similiar to John Wayne Gacy... burying their bodies in concrete in his basement.
---------------------------------------
James Homer Elledge -- sent to prison for life in 1975 after beating a Seattle motel owner to death with a ball-peen hammer. In the years that followed, he won parole 3 times, most recently in August 1995. prosecutors have now charged Elledge with 1st-degree murder for allegedly stabbing and strangling Eloise Jane Fitzner, 47, in a church basement.
---------------------------------------
Zeno E. Sims -- sent to prison for eight years for the murder of a 24-year-old-man. Released on parole, in Kansas City, he then murdered DeAntreia L Ashley, a 15-year-old-girl, after a minor traffic accident.
---------------------------------------
Arthur James Julius -- convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison. In 1978, he was given a brief leave from prison, during which he raped and murdered a cousin. He was sentenced to death for that crime and was executed on November 17, 1989.
---------------------------------------
In March 1979, a Graterford (Pa.) prison guard was murdered brutally by an inmate. The inmate -- at the time he murdered the guard -- already was serving a life sentence for the triple murder of two infants and an elderly woman.
---------------------------------------
In 1994, an inmate who already was serving two life sentences in the Philadelphia Industrial Correctional Center was sentenced to three more after he was convicted of stabbing three prison guards.
---------------------------------------
In 1995, two death-row inmates at the Florida State Prison in Starke were killed by their fellow inmates.
---------------------------------------
In 1999, a Beeville (Texas) prison guard was killed by an inmate already serving a sentence for murder.
---------------------------------------
On November 9, 1983 Associate U.S. Attorney General D. Lowell Jensen told a Senate subcommittee that it is impossible to punish or even deter such prison murders because, without a death sentence, a violent life-termer has free rein "to continue to murder as opportunity and his perverse motives dictate."
---------------------------------------
On October 22, 1983 at the federal penitentiary in Marion, Illinois, two prison guards were murdered in two SEPARATE instances by SEPARATE inmates who were both serving life terms for previously murdering inmates.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
You might be able to rehabilitate a thief or drug addict... but murderers, rapists, etc have crossed a line.

So we will go after Nelson Mandella for being a murderer?
He never rehabilitated into a man that was above violence? Every freedom fighter turned politician? The founders of Irish, French, American, Turkish, etc etc democracy were all beyond being able to stop killing people?
Anyone can change and anyone can kill in the right circumstances. The whole idea of rehabilitation is worthless if you say that someone is irredeemable.

Relapse wrote:
My opinion is that anyone guilty of the crimes these people are accused of committing need to be put down. It's not for revenge, but to eliminate any chance they have of doing this to someone else.

You know 6 foot of concrete between you and the outside world is as good a preventative? Once you move beyond just preventing them re-entering society then you are talking about revenge and not the protection of society.

There's s difference between killing and murder chief, you want to choose to ignore it that's you're problem not mine. Your need to compare soldiers to rapists and murders also suggests some internal issues and questions you need to sort out eh?

You know, I sometimes wonder how people could ever become as sick as the people who committed these crimes. But then I read the revenge fantasy porn in this thread and think 'man, and these are just middle class kids, and look at all the sick gak they want to do to some guys they just read about on-line. I guess I can kind of see how someone raised in a slum could end up as fethed up as those rapists.'

 liturgies of blood wrote:
The US, UK and Ireland use the same sort of defence against rape. All common law courts see that defence (don't know about civil law systems), the only difference is the weight that it carries. 30 years ago in the UK panorama had an exposé of the interview that rape victims had to suffer through. Nobody has an ivory tower to sit in.

Even with the best intentions rape is an extremely difficult thing to prosecute. Judicial systems have been struggling to establish the best ways to figure that out for a few decades now.

And while among some people there is, unfortunately, something of a bias to believe that a woman who was raped somehow did something to bring on the attack... the system itself doesn't allow that as a defence. What we're seeing here in India is a clear and distinct element of misogyny that we, thankfully, managed to remove from our societies generations ago.

And the point is not to single India out for the problems with sex in their society, because they're now looking to overcome them. The point is to acknowledge how far much of the world has to go.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Sure, they raped and killed a person. Why should their punishment be less worse than what they did to the victim?

Because it will be our legal processes giving that punishment. What we allow those processes to deliver reflects directly on us.

I, personally, am not a twisted little psycho, and so I don't revel or enjoy inflicting torture. And so I do not want my legal processes to do such things.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:
A SHORT LIST OF MURDERERS RELEASED TO MURDER AGAIN

Your argument ignores the idea that you can have life in prison mean life in prison, and is therefore useless in establishing the idea that the death penalty is somehow needed.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:


There's s difference between killing and murder chief, you want to choose to ignore it that's you're problem not mine. Your need to compare soldiers to rapists and murders also suggests some internal issues and questions you need to sort out eh?

Ha soldiers, so is that what we call terrorists who attack the state? OH NO WE DON'T, not yet anyway. History glosses over the facts and we forget that they killed people.
The difference between a gang and a soldier is time and a good PR team.

I didn't compare soldiers and rapists. You need to desperately justify your need to see some guys die.

The difference between murder and killing is if you get prosecuted. That is it. We don't prosecute soldiers because we understand that that murder(or the intentional killing of a human being) is justified in the defence of innocents. Self-defence is similar but we say that you can only use reasonable force and can only justify killing when a jury agrees that it was unavoidable. Lots of people have gotten caught on the wrong side of reasonable force, are these murderers irredeemable?
My point was that people kill and people who don't mean to kill get done for murder. Not everyone that murders is irredeemable and many have gone on to do great things and others just go on to become productive members of society.

Don King is a great business man and promotions expert.
The alleged former heads of the IRA work in government with former UDF members in Northern Ireland.
etc etc

You'll find that terrorists mostly murder, you guessed it! Civilians!

I don't need to see these men die, it's not something I jerk off to at night in the shower. Should they die? Why yes. Yes they should. But then, so should a rabid dog.

You want to talk the differences between freedom fighters and terrorists we're gonna have to start another thread, because that's a whole 'nother dog in a whole different fight.

"The difference between a gang and a soldier is time and a good PR team. "

*snicker* Man do you /read/ what you say?

I did read what I said, cos what were washington and his army? Insurgents and traitors to the crown, described as a gang of upstarts.
ANC described as a gang of murderers in their early days.
IRA, IRB, Irish volunteers were just gangs in the beginning.
Spartacus and his army of slaves started off as a few guys that escaped.
The people of france that rose up to storm the bastile?


The reason you kill a rabid dog is to prevent it doing harm to others and to end it's suffering. If you don't have to put a murderer "out of their misery", why do you have to kill it after you remove their ability to attack the public again? Has charles manson gotten out?
Did the Kray twins get out?
No.

@Sebster:

There are enough times that life in prison doesn't mean life in prison, added to the people some of these characters murder while in prison that lead to my opinion.
I'm not talking about executing someone that kills another person in the angry heat of a moment, but those that plan out a murder or torture someone to death as what happened in a lot of the examples I put forward.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
I did read what I said, cos what were washington and his army? Insurgents and traitors to the crown, described as a gang of upstarts.
ANC described as a gang of murderers in their early days.
IRA, IRB, Irish volunteers were just gangs in the beginning.
Spartacus and his army of slaves started off as a few guys that escaped.
The people of france that rose up to storm the bastile?


The reason you kill a rabid dog is to prevent it doing harm to others and to end it's suffering. If you don't have to put a murderer "out of their misery", why do you have to kill it after you remove their ability to attack the public again? Has charles manson gotten out?
Did the Kray twins get out?
No.

Those people I cited certainly got out.

We have the death sentence and some of the toughest crime laws. Yet we have more people in prison per capita than how many nations?

Please tell me how "tough on crime" has worked for us over the last 50 years?

 d-usa wrote:
We have the death sentence and some of the toughest crime laws. Yet we have more people in prison per capita than how many nations?

Please tell me how "tough on crime" has worked for us over the last 50 years?

Because... if we didn't, then we'd have total Anarchy here?

I think the prison/judicial system here is more about keeping the convicts out of the public than the actual punishment.

 d-usa wrote:
We have the death sentence and some of the toughest crime laws. Yet we have more people in prison per capita than how many nations?

Please tell me how "tough on crime" has worked for us over the last 50 years?

Don't forget, you also have a high racial bias in sentencing, proved the failure of the death penalty as a deterrent, given up on rehab in most cases and failed to tackle the root cause of crime- poverty and lack of education. Also many states don't remove psycholgically unsound prisoners from general population as it costs to much to treat them. (Not having a go, btw.)

The numbers of repeat offenders and murderers may be due to the "shank or be shanked" environment in American prisons where all of those cited examples come from. Hell there is a gang that has a business model bases on the pay or we'll shank your boys in jail principle. Do prisons even bother with rehabilitation and education for long term prisoners?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 purplefood wrote:

While I agree that legality doesn't necessarily make things morally right, someone who stood by and watched someone get brutally raped or even encouraged it should get just as harsh a penalty as the people who did it.

Not sure standing by is the same as carrying out the act. Plenty of people stood by out of fear in the past. Guilt or punishment by association isn't right either.

Also sometimes innocent people are executed.

I'll leave it to Grey Templar, he seems to be articulating the points that I want to make a lot better than I.

But one thing about Indian Prisons - they're awful. Like, really awful. They're nothing like US prisons. It would probably be crueler to let them live another 20 years in there (because I don't expect them to live very long in a New Delhi prison) than executing them. Just throwing that out there.

Hey, I'm not cleaning up your mess.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
We have the death sentence and some of the toughest crime laws. Yet we have more people in prison per capita than how many nations?

Please tell me how "tough on crime" has worked for us over the last 50 years?

Don't forget, you also have a high racial bias in sentencing, proved the failure of the death penalty as a deterrent, given up on rehab in most cases and failed to tackle the root cause of crime- poverty and lack of education. Also many states don't remove psycholgically unsound prisoners from general population as it costs to much to treat them. (Not having a go, btw.)

The numbers of repeat offenders and murderers may be due to the "shank or be shanked" environment in American prisons where all of those cited examples come from. Hell there is a gang that has a business model bases on the pay or we'll shank your boys in jail principle. Do prisons even bother with rehabilitation and education for long term prisoners?

In all fairness, if the criminals in those examples I cited were executed, the death penalty would have been a great deterrent to the murders of their later victims.

You could always put them in a woman's prison; let them decide how best to treat them and leave no blood on your own hands.

On a more sane note, the prisons just further show how archaic and backwards the Indian governing system is. In dire need of an updated policy.

Relapse wrote:
@Sebster:

There are enough times that life in prison doesn't mean life in prison, added to the people some of these characters murder while in prison that lead to my opinion.

And I'm saying that you can just as easily fix that by making life mean life. The argument 'horrible people who committed horrible crimes are released and kill again, and the death penalty will stop that' ignores that we are quite capable of simply choosing not to release them.

It's a false argument. The death penalty may well be perfectly valid, but not because of the reason 'otherwise we'll end up letting them out again'. Because people who we might decide to put to death, we can just as easily declare 'you're never getting out, no matter what'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cheesecat wrote:
Also sometimes innocent people execution.

And by putting the death penalty into the mix, you're adding a really emotive element to a procedure that needs to be as rational and evidence based as possible to ensure we're only convicting people we know to be guilty. And that quickly leads to wrong verdicts.

 sebster wrote:

Relapse wrote:
@Sebster:

There are enough times that life in prison doesn't mean life in prison, added to the people some of these characters murder while in prison that lead to my opinion.

And I'm saying that you can just as easily fix that by making life mean life. The argument 'horrible people who committed horrible crimes are released and kill again, and the death penalty will stop that' ignores that we are quite capable of simply choosing not to release them.

It's a false argument. The death penalty may well be perfectly valid, but not because of the reason 'otherwise we'll end up letting them out again'. Because people who we might decide to put to death, we can just as easily declare 'you're never getting out, no matter what'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cheesecat wrote:
Also sometimes innocent people execution.

And by putting the death penalty into the mix, you're adding a really emotive element to a procedure that needs to be as rational and evidence based as possible to ensure we're only convicting people we know to be guilty. And that quickly leads to wrong verdicts.

I guess, I don't know the rates on innocent people who suffered the death penalty, also that was a horrible post on my part.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Have you considered maybe your heart should bleed for the victims instead of those who did such harm?

False choice much?

 AustonT wrote:

1.you are a sexist pig, women have primal urges too.

Man, noun.

1. An adult male human.

2. All humans collectively; mankind, humankind.

But of course you already knew that, so I don't really see the point of that part of your post.

 AustonT wrote:

2. Primal urges like beating a couple with an iron pipe, raping the woman, and dumping both naked in the street? Yeah they are in fact subhuman.

So why stoop to their level?

 Cheesecat wrote:
Also sometimes innocent people are executed.

It would be interesting to compare the number of innocent people executed to the number of people killed by those put in prison for murder and then later released.

After reading the 3 pages written while I didn't had interet, I can only say that Hammurabi would not be proud, but somewhat horrorized at the bloodlust shown in here.

The way this went over death penalty and some oppinions, reminded me of an old movie where people had microchips in them so the ones who would be outstanding would never develop their potential (specially intellectual), so everyone was an equal, average citizen... and juries convicted men to the electric chair for minor crimes, because who knows what they'll do tomorrow, and was aired on public tv for the amusement of the people.