Three US women missing for years rescued in Ohio

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**hotsauceman1**

Frazzled wrote:
Ot a free for all society where punishment is death? Why not kill everyone for a crime? If you are not willing to pay for 20 years why pay for 1?

Ah now you're starting to come around at last.

But I'll go with life if you so desperately want it, in the Black Hole of Calcutta.

Here is an idea, Bring back penal colonies. Get Dubai to make us some islands from sand in the middle of the ocean, put the worst there. That way we all win. They re stuck on an island where thye cant get out, so we wont support them. And we dont have to kill them.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
Someone punishing a criminal can NEVER be as bad as a person that committed a crime on a innocent person, same actions..completely different motivations, soldiers kill the enemy in combat does that make them murderers, maybe so if you apply that logic.

Sorry buddy, some people on this big world need to be removed when their sick demented tendencies come to light.

your rose colored ideas of how things should be are naïve at best, go spend some time at a prison or sit in on some court cases, and watch our wonderful legal system at work..or not work as the case may be, we have child rapists and repeat offenders constantly being shown the door, 5 years good behavior on a 30 year sentence.

Then they move in 2 doors down from you....

I have read court cases. I have read horrible books(One moment will always stay with me is reading a book about dehumanizing, where Japanese soldier pput explosives in pregnant womens wombs). I know what im talking about, But what im scared of is a society where we fall in love with the killing, the death and the execution of these prisoners, where we become so blood thirsty that we may not even care about the trial or a system, wher they kill you on the spot, Which is what people here are proposing. I think your ideas of killing people for crimes is sick.

So... you're okay with life in prison for this fethers even after up to five deliberate abortions-by-beating:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2320519/Amanda-Berry-Gina-DeJesus-Michele-Knight-Ohio-trio-went-missing-TEN-YEARS-ago-ALIVE.html

TBh, I want those fethers dead as anyone else, what im saying is that we shouldn't let ourselves do it, we should be better then them.

**Alfndrate**

Edit nvm reread it.

**Soo'Vah'Cha**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
Someone punishing a criminal can NEVER be as bad as a person that committed a crime on a innocent person, same actions..completely different motivations, soldiers kill the enemy in combat does that make them murderers, maybe so if you apply that logic.

Sorry buddy, some people on this big world need to be removed when their sick demented tendencies come to light.

your rose colored ideas of how things should be are naïve at best, go spend some time at a prison or sit in on some court cases, and watch our wonderful legal system at work..or not work as the case may be, we have child rapists and repeat offenders constantly being shown the door, 5 years good behavior on a 30 year sentence.

Then they move in 2 doors down from you....

I have read court cases. I have read horrible books(One moment will always stay with me is reading a book about dehumanizing, where Japanese soldier pput explosives in pregnant womens wombs). I know what im talking about, But what im scared of is a society where we fall in love with the killing, the death and the execution of these prisoners, where we become so blood thirsty that we may not even care about the trial or a system, wher they kill you on the spot, Which is what people here are proposing. I think your ideas of killing people for crimes is sick.

Sorry kid, but reading a book is not the same as watching a rapist slip through punishment because of a technicality on the arrest, or hear a criminal brag about beating a old woman half to death for her welfare check, I did bailiff duty in my younger days, and it started turning my stomach.

nobody is advocating some kinda pol pot regime, but when its beyond even a shadow of a fact, why give these animals a chance to do it to someone else again, and don't say "MY" ideas of killing people for crimes, its a concept of punishment matches the crime where possible.

what I find sick is people that allow criminals to be caught, tried incarcerated ( for tens of thousands of dollars in costs) released, and commit the same crimes again on new innocents...and these same people that call that justice..pat themselves on the back and say.."My look at how civilized we are."

I'm done here the level of bleeding heart is at bucket deep.

**Ardaric_Vaanes**

I'd say for the criminals, they deserve the death penalty, but it should be done as quickly as possible. The objective would be to:

1: Remove them from the world as soon as possible, They can't touch anyone anymore six feet underneath the ground.

2: Do it with minimum cost to the public

If you're going to go for the mutilation thing, (granted they deserve it) but who's going to do such a severe thing in the end? you lot lol? Big talk.... And even if someone did step up and do the deed, let's say said individual disembowelled him on national television < it'd raise some questions about the executioner himself and his own state of mind.

As tempting as it might be for some people, torture executions should not be the way to go, as responsible citizens we're better than that. Personally I just want these people gone, as quickly as possible.

Kill them the rational way, remove the threat with minimum cost and spectacle, put the sickos up against the wall and shoot them then bill their relatives for the bullets (if they have them) quick and simple, problem solved.

**Redbeard**

hotsauceman1 wrote:This isnt about being squimish to kill, this is ABOUT how it would make us just as bad as them.

I disagree that the clinical disposal of individuals who pose a threat to society is as bad as posing a threat to society.

And as a society we have to come to terms, what do we want, a civilized society where we do not go towards acts of vendettas against some, because like i said, those acts are clouded by hate and anger. Ot a free for all society where punishment is death? Why not kill everyone for a crime? If you are not willing to pay for 20 years why pay for 1?

I agree. The US incarcerates a higher percentage of its citizens than any other country. A lot of this is because there is a huge industry around keeping people in jail. Many prisons are privatized and provide jobs in communities, both of which provide political capital for keeping the system as is. Three-strikes laws, mandatory sentencing and so forth have created an overcrowded prison system in which people who shouldn't be locked up (relatively harmless drug offenses) are, and people who shouldn't be let go (those who have committed violent crimes) are released early. It's quite counter-intuitive if you examine it.

I think all violent criminals should be executed, and all non-violent criminals should be seen as redeemable, not locked up indefinitely.

But there's a saying, "No one ever got elected running on prison reform".

Fafnir wrote:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

They don't just inject someone and call it a day. Most people on death row tend to be there for a very long time, requiring the same tax burden of any other criminal, and then there's the massive amount of appeals involved which end up costing more than lifetime incarceration.

That's because it's poorly implemented. That wasn't the case 100 years ago. Follow the money - there's a reason it costs a lot to execute someone today - because there's an industry getting rich off of it. It doesn't need to. Once upon a time, all you needed was a gallows, and that was even reusable.

Of course, you'll spew some nonsense about the chance that someone innocent is accidentally executed without all these checks and balances. And, I'll even grant you - yes, that might happen. However, the odds still favor doing it because the chances are pretty low, compared to the very high chances of a repeat offender committing a violent crime against an innocent person. It's simple math really. Some innocent people are going to die. Fewer innocent people die if you execute criminals than if you don't.

**hotsauceman1**

Im not a bleeding heart, I have not sympathy for the fethers like i said. What i do not want is out society to become so hellbent on revenge we loose ourselves in it.
And why is you seeing it different from me reading it? It both happened, one just saw it in person.
And here is why i do not like the death penalty either
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Todd_Willingham

**kronk**

hotsauceman1 wrote:

And why is you seeing it different from me reading it? It both happened, one just saw it in person.

Well, reading a penthouse forums letter, while entertaining, is not nearly as awesome was watching Chesty Laroo in action.

**Redbeard**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
What i do not want is out society to become so hellbent on revenge we loose ourselves in it.

Why do you insist it is revenge? It's a pragmatic solution that removes dangerous elements from society so that they no longer pose a threat, at a reasonable cost. It could even be argued that it is more humane to kill someone than to lock them in a cage for 40+ years.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

hotsauceman1 wrote:

And here is why i do not like the death penalty either
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Todd_Willingham

Yup, there it is....

Care to provide the statistics for the number of innocent people killed by repeat offenders every year, or a heart wrenching empirical story about the single mother of three who got killed by some junkie released from an overcrowded jail after being locked up for a prior violent crime?

**hotsauceman1**

It can easily slip into revenge is what I'm saying. Or could also turn into systemized revenge where people see those who committed the crimes so lowly that they can abuse them all they want with w/o care because they are so lowly, threfore becoming horriblee people themselves.

**Frazzled**

whembly wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
Someone punishing a criminal can NEVER be as bad as a person that committed a crime on a innocent person, same actions..completely different motivations, soldiers kill the enemy in combat does that make them murderers, maybe so if you apply that logic.

Sorry buddy, some people on this big world need to be removed when their sick demented tendencies come to light.

your rose colored ideas of how things should be are naïve at best, go spend some time at a prison or sit in on some court cases, and watch our wonderful legal system at work..or not work as the case may be, we have child rapists and repeat offenders constantly being shown the door, 5 years good behavior on a 30 year sentence.

Then they move in 2 doors down from you....

I have read court cases. I have read horrible books(One moment will always stay with me is reading a book about dehumanizing, where Japanese soldier pput explosives in pregnant womens wombs). I know what im talking about, But what im scared of is a society where we fall in love with the killing, the death and the execution of these prisoners, where we become so blood thirsty that we may not even care about the trial or a system, wher they kill you on the spot, Which is what people here are proposing. I think your ideas of killing people for crimes is sick.

So... you're okay with life in prison for this fethers even after up to five deliberate abortions-by-beating:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2320519/Amanda-Berry-Gina-DeJesus-Michele-Knight-Ohio-trio-went-missing-TEN-YEARS-ago-ALIVE.html

As noted the needle, while not justice, works too.

**uk_crow**

This is such a sad story, I hope those girls can get back to a normal life if that's possible after their torment. Their captors are monsters, they should be shown no remorse, just as they have shown none.

**Ahtman**

The death penalty, as it stands, is neither pragmatic nor cost effective. Using an imaginary 'oh if it were this way' standard for it doesn't really do much to further the discussion because we can only deal with the reality of the death penalty, not a fantasy of it. Even then it is still problematic as saying killing is so terrible the only solution is killing makes little sense. Even more so when no one is killed. Add in an imperfect system and really the only good reason for such a thing is that it satiates some lizard brain desire in us for retribution, not justice.

**Frazzled**

OK. Supermax. They never interact with another person ever again. Solitary forever with 30 minutes in a solitary enclosed space for exercise.

**Alfndrate**

Frazzled wrote:
OK. Supermax. They never interact with another person ever again. Solitary forever with 30 minutes in a solitary enclosed space for exercise.

Can we also put them in like a "supermax" farm so they have to provide for their own stuff?

**KalashnikovMarine**

I think we need to reform the death penalty with a fast track for executions. You get two appeals, and it's best two out of three. So if two juries back to back find you guilty on all charges, do not pass go, do not collect $100 dollars, here's your last meal, you die at dawn. Toss some built in safe guards and overwatch to double check evidence and overzealous prosecutors and go from there.

I do not understand objections to "cruel and unusual" punishment. While a judge should be benevolent in purpose, his awards should cause the criminal to suffer, else there is no punishment---and pain is the basic mechanism built into us by millions of years of evolution which safeguards us by warning when something threatens our survival. Why should society refuse to use such a highly perfected survival mechanism? However, that period was loaded with pre-scientific pseudo-psychological nonsense. As for "unusual', punishment Must be unusual or it serves no purpose.

-Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers

**Ahtman**

When it comes to killing people, we ignore the Founding Fathers and the Constitution in favor of sci-fi authors, but when it comes to background checks for firearms the Founding Fathers are sacrosanct and their foresight and wisdom beyond reproach.

**Frazzled**

Exactly.

**Redbeard**

Ahtman wrote:
When it comes to killing people, we ignore the Founding Fathers and the Constitution in favor of sci-fi authors, but when it comes to background checks for firearms the Founding Fathers are sacrosanct and their foresight and wisdom beyond reproach.

Does the Constitution say anything about Capital punishment? I didn't think so, but it's been a while since I read it all. We ignore a lot of what the Founding Fathers said anyway. We don't own slaves anymore, do we? Treating them like mythical infallible beings is a mistake, they too were humans, and humans who happened to live over 200 years ago.

**Ahtman**

Redbeard wrote:
We ignore a lot of what the Founding Fathers said anyway.

Unless it deals with the Second Amendment, it would seem.

Redbeard wrote:
Treating them like mythical infallible beings is a mistake, they too were humans, and humans who happened to live over 200 years ago.

I get the impression you didn't read any of the gun threads, or perhaps you just like making my points for me. Still, it is appreciated.

**Bullockist**

kronk wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:

And why is you seeing it different from me reading it? It both happened, one just saw it in person.

Well, reading a penthouse forums letter, while entertaining, is not nearly as awesome was watching Chesty Laroo in action.

I don't even know who chesty laroo is i assume someone from the early 80's by the name, but damn that made me laugh...thanks Kronk

In regard to punishing these guys, I am generally against corperal punishment and torture but in this case I think I'll support continuous waterboarding. I think that would give the felon a good comparison to the fear, discomfort and powerlessness these abductees felt.

Founding fathers? Isn't that the statement someone trots out in the US when they want to evoke some huge emotive response?

**Alfndrate**

Can we take the gun talk back to the gun threads please?

**Ma55ter_fett**

Redbeard wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:
I agree, Life in prison.

Do you know how much it costs to incarcerate someone for a year, let alone the rest of their life? Society shouldn't be forced to endure a tax burden because some people are too squeamish to kill. Any crime that results in a life sentence should be a death penalty.

Supposedly it costs more if you give them the death penalty because of all the appeals and what not.

And before you say that they shouldn't be allowed to appeal or should have a limited number of appeals you have to remember that there are always those death row inmates whom are later exonerated when new evidence comes to light. Also minors can be sentenced to life, so if we were to change life in jail to death then you would have instances were kids as young as 15 would be getting death sentences.

Then you have to consider the number of people whom are currently serving life sentences which this article http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/us/23sentence.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 by the NY time’s states is 140,000 or 1/10 of the prison population. So to save money the “not squeamish” people would have to kill 140,000 people some of whom might be innocent and some of whom are minors.

Now I’ll admit there are some people who really should be put down like the rabid dogs they are and if these guys are convicted I wouldn’t bat an eye if they got the death penalty. However I find your willingness to kill 140,000 of the current prison population a little bloodthirsty and unsettling.

**Redbeard**

Ma55ter_fett wrote:

Now I’ll admit there are some people who really should be put down like the rabid dogs they are and if these guys are convicted I wouldn’t bat an eye if they got the death penalty. However I find your willingness to kill 140,000 of the current prison population a little bloodthirsty and unsettling.

I think your estimate of how many I think deserve to die is low. It has nothing to do with bloodthirst, it has to do with being pragmatic.

Seriously, if you were given the option to spend the rest of your life in a tiny cell, isolated from friends and family, under observation 24/7, with no privacy, or other human rights - or you could die, why would you choose to live in those conditions? I know I wouldn't. I don't get the aversion to death without quality of life that our society seems to cling to. We'll grant our pets a humane death if they're badly injured or sick, but will keep grandma on a ventilator for years. Life in a cell is no life, and the only reason that we have all these appeals and delays is because the prison-industrial complex profits from it.

Yes, there are a handful of cases where someone innocent is executed that keep getting dragged out as empirical evidence, but they're statistically inconsequential. The vast majority of prisoners on death row are there because they deserve to be. Again, it's a numbers game. The idiot saying goes something like "better 1000 guilty men go free than one innocent man is killed", but if 1000 guilty men go free, that's 1000 more innocent victims. If the goal is to minimize the number of innocent people harmed, then it's far more reasonable to let the occasional mistake happen than to let known criminals go free.

**Fafnir**

One of the major goals there is to also preserve the integrity of the justice system itself.

**Ma55ter_fett**

Redbeard wrote:
Ma55ter_fett wrote:

Now I’ll admit there are some people who really should be put down like the rabid dogs they are and if these guys are convicted I wouldn’t bat an eye if they got the death penalty. However I find your willingness to kill 140,000 of the current prison population a little bloodthirsty and unsettling.

I think your estimate of how many I think deserve to die is low. It has nothing to do with bloodthirst, it has to do with being pragmatic.

Seriously, if you were given the option to spend the rest of your life in a tiny cell, isolated from friends and family, under observation 24/7, with no privacy, or other human rights - or you could die, why would you choose to live in those conditions? I know I wouldn't. I don't get the aversion to death without quality of life that our society seems to cling to. We'll grant our pets a humane death if they're badly injured or sick, but will keep grandma on a ventilator for years. Life in a cell is no life, and the only reason that we have all these appeals and delays is because the prison-industrial complex profits from it.

Yes, there are a handful of cases where someone innocent is executed that keep getting dragged out as empirical evidence, but they're statistically inconsequential. The vast majority of prisoners on death row are there because they deserve to be. Again, it's a numbers game. The idiot saying goes something like "better 1000 guilty men go free than one innocent man is killed", but if 1000 guilty men go free, that's 1000 more innocent victims. If the goal is to minimize the number of innocent people harmed, then it's far more reasonable to let the occasional mistake happen than to let known criminals go free.

So in your mind by killing those 140,000 people you're really doing them a favor?

Redbeard wrote:
Seriously, if you were given the option to spend the rest of your life in a tiny cell, isolated from friends and family, under observation 24/7, with no privacy, or other human rights - or you could die, why would you choose to live in those conditions?

I would choose to live, so to I think would most people.

**Bullockist**

These innocent people you are so blaze about are only inconsequential if you look at them from a statistical basis. They are all people, some ones' son, sister, father ect. I totally agree with the "idiot" saying, having one innocent person die as a result of a justice system feth up is too many. These feth ups happen too often in my opinion, in my country it has a lot to do with sloppy police work, it is one of the reasons I'm glad we don't have a death penalty.

Killing some one is cheaper yes, but when you kill the wrong person in a litigious culture, I imagine the costs skyrocket, how much do you pay a persons family who the state murdered?

I think you've got a tinfoil hat on in regard to the "prison/industrial complex profits from it". In my country we do not have that many private prisons and our greatest penalty is life in prison , losing 20 years of your life to that kind of enviroment is truly a penalty , and we hand out life for truly henious crimes, sadly murder can get you only 7 years. Our state prisons make no money off these prisoners.

If your government decides to save money by outsourcing prisons you cannot turn around and say it's all a scam to make money. You had incarceration before private prisons, private prisons did not change your legal system at all.

In regard to people choosing not to live in a prison enviroment, what a load of tosh. People choose to live all the time, even in concentration camps *gasp* It is a human imperitive to struggle to live.

**Redbeard**

Bullockist wrote:
These innocent people you are so blaze about are only inconsequential if you look at them from a statistical basis.

You misread what I said. I'm not blaze about innocent people. I want to save as many as possible. That means going with the high probability method of removing known threats to innocent people (criminals). Victims of crime are innocent people. Victims of repeat offender crimes are innocent people that could have been prevented.

I think you've got a tinfoil hat on in regard to the "prison/industrial complex profits from it". In my country we do not have that many private prisons

I'm not talking about your country then, am I. You've got blinders on if you think that privatized prisons don't lobby in favor of longer minimum sentences, longer appeals processes and banning the death penalty. They're a business, primarily concerned with their bottom line.

...sadly murder can get you only 7 years.

So, when the murderers walk free after seven years, and kill someone else, how much do you pay that victim's family?

If your government decides to save money by outsourcing prisons you cannot turn around and say it's all a scam to make money. You had incarceration before private prisons, private prisons did not change your legal system at all.

You should do some research before making such claims. Since the privatization of many prisons, average sentences have gone up. Mandatory minimums have been increased. "Three strikes" laws have been implemented that impose harsh sentences for minor drug violations. No politician will say anything about this, because their opponent will attack them for being weak on crime. There's a reason that the US has a greater percentage of their population incarcerated than any other nation - people are making money off the prisoners. Be happy that isn't the case in your country, but don't say it isn't happening here.

In regard to people choosing not to live in a prison enviroment, what a load of tosh. People choose to live all the time, even in concentration camps *gasp* It is a human imperitive to struggle to live.

Which explains high prison suicide rates, right? It is a human imperative not to live in a cage too. Unfortunately, our litigious society exacts penalties on prisons where inmates have killed themselves, claiming the prison is to blame for not preventing it. Is it so hard to believe that people don't actually want to spend their life in jail though?

**MeanGreenStompa**

The incompetence of the police in this case is staggering, mind blowing and tragic.

http://jezebel.com/police-visit-cleveland-house-of-horrors-several-times-494824408

Police Visit Cleveland House of Horrors Several Times, Fail to Note Horrors
In new news from Cleveland's horrific kidnapping case, neighbors are alleging that they called the police multiple times to the home where Ariel Castro and his two brothers held Michelle Knight, Gina DeJesus, and Amanda Berry hostage for ten years. Neighbors claim that even though their calls described chilling scenarios — naked women on leashes crawling on all fours and women pounding on windows — they were either ignored, or the police completed very cursory check-ins.

According to neighbors, the situation at Ariel Castro's house was far from non-stop super fun barbecue parties.

Elsie Cintron, who lives three houses away, said her daughter once saw a naked woman crawling on her hands and knees in the backyard several years ago and called police. "But they didn't take it seriously," she said.

Another neighbor, Israel Lugo, said he heard pounding on some of the doors of Castro's house, which had plastic bags on the windows, in November 2011. Lugo said officers knocked on the front door, but no one answered. "They walked to the side of the house and then left," he said.

Neighbors also said they would sometimes see Ariel Castro walking a little girl to a neighborhood playground. And Cintron said she once saw a little girl looking out of the house's attic window.

Israel Lugo said he, his family and neighbors called police three times between 2011 and 2012 after seeing disturbing things at the home of Ariel Castro. Lugo lives two houses down from Castro and grew suspicious after neighbors reported seeing naked women on leashes crawling on all fours behind Castro's house.

Lugo said about two years ago his sister told him she heard a woman pounding on a window at Castro's home as if she needed help. When his sister looked up, she saw a woman and a baby standing in a window half covered with a wooden plank. His sister told him and Lugo called the police.
But wait, there's more!

A third call came from neighborhood women who lived in an apartment building. Those women told Lugo they called police because they saw three young girls crawling on all fours naked with dog leashes around their necks. Three men were controlling them in the backyard. The women told Lugo they waited two hours but police never responded to the calls.
However, Cleveland officials said they have no record of any calls about criminal activity at the house, but that they are "still combing their records". Ugh.

This is especially heinous news as we learn about the conditions in the house. According Khalid Samad, a former assistant safety director for the city who now works for a crime prevention non-profit, told USA Today law enforcement officials told him the women were beaten while pregnant, with unborn children not surviving, and that there was a dungeon of sorts with chains. All the shudders, forever.

In another intense revelation from this story, Emily Castro, Ariel's daughter, is currently serving 25 years in prison for allegedly slashing her 11-month-old daughter's throat four times in 2007. She then cut her own neck and wrists and attempted to drown herself in a nearby creek. She suffers from manic depression diagnosed when she was 13, the court record says.

Ariel Castro's 31-year-old son Anthony, a journalism student who bizarrely/coincidentally wrote an article about Gina DeJesus' disappearance in 2004, says "This is beyond comprehension ... I'm truly stunned right now."

This case just gets more and more mind-blowing and heartbreaking.

[USA Today]

**Easy E**

This thread has taught me that all Americans LOVE the consitutition, unless it gets in the way of their feelings.

This is a horrible, horrible crime. However, it must still be treated as a crime, investigated, prosecuted, and the ruling of the court enforced as a crime per our American and Constitutionally enacted laws.

Right now, we don't have Journalism or much investigation; we have a media circus.

**Frazzled**

Easy E wrote:

This is a horrible, horrible crime. However, it must still be treated as a crime, investigated, prosecuted, and the ruling of the court enforced as a crime per our American and Constitutionally enacted laws.

Right now, we don't have Journalism or much investigation; we have a media circus.

I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise, so get off your freaking high horse.