A Case for Jury Nullification...

[rasetsu]

I don't get the point of this thread other than Seth attempting to make a controversy of something that is not in the least bit controversial.

Perhaps the cops should have taken the father in the back of the squad car, rapped him upside the head a few times with a night stick and released him with a warning. After all, if we're advocating street justice, why not let the cops have a piece of the action. And when the young peeper arrives at the county jail, the jailer can stick him in the far cell with the overgrown bear of a man and leave this pervert alone with him as he goes "for a cup of coffee" with a wink and a nod to seal the deal. And then they can accidentally have him housed in a facility for violent offendors while he awaits trial. Yes this "off the books justice" is looking swell.

I'm reminded of a similar theme in a thread on my other forum, regarding the sentencing of the rapists in India. Many people are suggesting that, if we're sure that they're guilty of this heinous crime, then it's okay to institute a barbaric punishment, if for no other reason than it might provide some emotional comfort to the families of the victims. I may be thinking outside the box here, but I rather suspect that providing emotional jollies for society or victims by inflicting unusual pain and suffering upon a criminal is not and should not be a primary goal of our penal system. Making them pay doesn't uncrime the crime, nor make the victim any less raped or dead. All it does is provide some visceral pleasure to those who are into that sort of thing. Once the criminal had been stopped, pursuing him and endeavoring to achieve some level of emotional release by beating him was a folly of their own and should be treated accordingly. Yes, the behavior is understandable. That doesn't mean it should be condoned or encouraged through action or inaction. What's next, "she was dressed like a whore, so his raping her was understandable." Oh, well, very good; off you go. The fact that it is understable doesn't make it either justifiable or excusable.

/rant

[Seth]

I don't get the point of this thread other than Seth attempting to make a controversy of something that is not in the least bit controversial.

I'm using the incident as a starting point for a discussion of the jury system of criminal justice. You got a problem with that?

Perhaps the cops should have taken the father in the back of the squad car, rapped him upside the head a few times with a night stick and released him with a warning. After all, if we're advocating street justice, why not let the cops have a piece of the action.

Well, the point of the thread is that we are NOT talking about "street justice" except perhaps peripherally.

And when the young peeper arrives at the county jail, the jailer can stick him in the far cell with the overgrown bear of a man and leave this pervert alone with him as he goes "for a cup of coffee" with a wink and a nod to seal the deal. And then they can accidentally have him housed in a facility for violent offendors while he awaits trial. Yes this "off the books justice" is looking swell.

I personally have a real problem with the violence in our (or anybody's) prison system. It's my position that when one is sentenced to incarceration for a set period as punishment for committing a crime, that one has a constitutional right to leave the prison at the end of the sentence in at least the same condition one entered it, and that it is the absolute unquestionable duty of the prison officials to ensure that this happens, on peril of being punished themselves for failing to protect EVERY prisoner in their custody.

If this means that EVERY prisoner must be kept in their own cell in 23/7 lockdown in order to prevent violence among inmates, so be it. And any prisoner who initiates violence against another should be sent to death row immediately and executed within 10 days, after an internal hearing establishing guilt.

I'm reminded of a similar theme in a thread on my other forum, regarding the sentencing of the rapists in India. Many people are suggesting that, if we're sure that they're guilty of this heinous crime, then it's okay to institute a barbaric punishment, if for no other reason than it might provide some emotional comfort to the families of the victims. I may be thinking outside the box here, but I rather suspect that providing emotional jollies for society or victims by inflicting unusual pain and suffering upon a criminal is not and should not be a primary goal of our penal system. Making them pay doesn't uncrime the crime, nor make the victim any less raped or dead. All it does is provide some visceral pleasure to those who are into that sort of thing. Once the criminal had been stopped, pursuing him and endeavoring to achieve some level of emotional release by beating him was a folly of their own and should be treated accordingly. Yes, the behavior is understandable. That doesn't mean it should be condoned or encouraged through action or inaction. What's next, "she was dressed like a whore, so his raping her was understandable." Oh, well, very good; off you go. The fact that it is understable doesn't make it either justifiable or excusable.

Well, that's the beauty of the jury nullification concept. It subjects a person accused of a crime to a trial by a jury of his peers, who view all the evidence and decide what is justice under those particular circumstances. It's the final check and balance on the power of the State to convict and punish those who need not or should not be punished.

[pErvinalia]

I don't get the point of this thread other than Seth attempting to make a controversy of something that is not in the least bit controversial.

Perhaps the cops should have taken the father in the back of the squad car, rapped him upside the head a few times with a night stick and released him with a warning. After all, if we're advocating street justice, why not let the cops have a piece of the action. And when the young peeper arrives at the county jail, the jailer can stick him in the far cell with the overgrown bear of a man and leave this pervert alone with him as he goes "for a cup of coffee" with a wink and a nod to seal the deal. And then they can accidentally have him housed in a facility for violent offendors while he awaits trial. Yes this "off the books justice" is looking swell.

I'm reminded of a similar theme in a thread on my other forum, regarding the sentencing of the rapists in India. Many people are suggesting that, if we're sure that they're guilty of this heinous crime, then it's okay to institute a barbaric punishment, if for no other reason than it might provide some emotional comfort to the families of the victims. I may be thinking outside the box here, but I rather suspect that providing emotional jollies for society or victims by inflicting unusual pain and suffering upon a criminal is not and should not be a primary goal of our penal system. Making them pay doesn't uncrime the crime, nor make the victim any less raped or dead. All it does is provide some visceral pleasure to those who are into that sort of thing. Once the criminal had been stopped, pursuing him and endeavoring to achieve some level of emotional release by beating him was a folly of their own and should be treated accordingly. Yes, the behavior is understandable. That doesn't mean it should be condoned or encouraged through action or inaction. What's next, "she was dressed like a whore, so his raping her was understandable." Oh, well, very good; off you go. The fact that it is understable doesn't make it either justifiable or excusable.

/rant

[mistermack]

Perhaps the cops should have taken the father in the back of the squad car, rapped him upside the head a few times with a night stick and released him with a warning. After all, if we're advocating street justice, why not let the cops have a piece of the action. And when the young peeper arrives at the county jail, the jailer can stick him in the far cell with the overgrown bear of a man and leave this pervert alone with him as he goes "for a cup of coffee" with a wink and a nod to seal the deal. And then they can accidentally have him housed in a facility for violent offenders while he awaits trial. Yes this "off the books justice" is looking swell.

I'm with you on all of that. The problem with lawless '' justice '' isn't just that it often goes too far, or gets the wrong person.
It's that violence often breeds violence.
If someone gave me that kind of beating, even if I HAD been peeping, I'd make sure that they paid in kind. Even if it took years, I'd make them suffer far worse than I did. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

And as for the jail bit, from what I've read, it was his treatment in jail that drove Charles Manson to do what he did.
It was revenge on '' society '' for what happened to him in jail.
And I'm sure that HE'S not the only one.

[Coito ergo sum]

Perhaps the cops should have taken the father in the back of the squad car, rapped him upside the head a few times with a night stick and released him with a warning. After all, if we're advocating street justice, why not let the cops have a piece of the action. And when the young peeper arrives at the county jail, the jailer can stick him in the far cell with the overgrown bear of a man and leave this pervert alone with him as he goes "for a cup of coffee" with a wink and a nod to seal the deal. And then they can accidentally have him housed in a facility for violent offenders while he awaits trial. Yes this "off the books justice" is looking swell.

I'm with you on all of that. The problem with lawless '' justice '' isn't just that it often goes too far, or gets the wrong person.
It's that violence often breeds violence.
If someone gave me that kind of beating, even if I HAD been peeping, I'd make sure that they paid in kind. Even if it took years, I'd make them suffer far worse than I did. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

The fact that you see that as a natural reaction on your part, or at least an understandable reaction, should allow you to empathize with the father who caught some creep naked and wanking it while peeping in his pubescent daughter's window with who knows what sort of ultimate intent. I mean, I certainly understand the visceral and immediate reaction that one would have in that circumstance. Maybe share a little of your understanding and empathy with the innocent, rather than save it all for the creeps.

And as for the jail bit, from what I've read, it was his treatment in jail that drove Charles Manson to do what he did.
It was revenge on '' society '' for what happened to him in jail.
And I'm sure that HE'S not the only one.

Jail is definitely a type of punishment that is used too much and does more damage than good. With today's technology, warehousing humans in pits of despair to thrash about and learn to be criminals is not necessary. I think all nonviolent offenders should be dealt with via loss of liberty through the use of technology. Implants and other tracking devices, home confinement, compelled labor, compelled education and counseling -- that sort of thing. For violent offenders, the freeing up of the jail space should allow the violent offenders to be dealt with on a more one-on-one level, without lumping them in with the nonviolent folks.

Prison was meant as a reform, a progression past corporal and capital punishment for minor crimes and major crimes alike. A way to reform people. A more humane punishment, but it's really not. Frankly, give me some time in the stocks having fruits lobbed at me over time in jail any day of the week. Just get it over with.

[piscator]

Perhaps the cops should have taken the father in the back of the squad car, rapped him upside the head a few times with a night stick and released him with a warning. After all, if we're advocating street justice, why not let the cops have a piece of the action. And when the young peeper arrives at the county jail, the jailer can stick him in the far cell with the overgrown bear of a man and leave this pervert alone with him as he goes "for a cup of coffee" with a wink and a nod to seal the deal. And then they can accidentally have him housed in a facility for violent offenders while he awaits trial. Yes this "off the books justice" is looking swell.

I'm with you on all of that. The problem with lawless '' justice '' isn't just that it often goes too far, or gets the wrong person.
It's that violence often breeds violence.
If someone gave me that kind of beating, even if I HAD been peeping, I'd make sure that they paid in kind. Even if it took years, I'd make them suffer far worse than I did. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

The fact that you see that as a natural reaction on your part, or at least an understandable reaction, should allow you to empathize with the father who caught some creep naked and wanking it while peeping in his pubescent daughter's window with who knows what sort of ultimate intent. I mean, I certainly understand the visceral and immediate reaction that one would have in that circumstance. Maybe share a little of your understanding and empathy with the innocent, rather than save it all for the creeps.

I know. It's like some are completely willing sever the cause of the beating from the effect of the beating to promote the arbitrary general conclusion that physical force is a higher degree of crime than pederasty. It wasn't severable to Mr Chavez at the time.

Moreover, Mr Chavez' s response to the crime perpetrated against his daughter - thus him - should not be represented as part of the justice or penal system - Mr Chavez was a victim of a crime and acting in the passion of the moment.

[Seth]

Perhaps the cops should have taken the father in the back of the squad car, rapped him upside the head a few times with a night stick and released him with a warning. After all, if we're advocating street justice, why not let the cops have a piece of the action. And when the young peeper arrives at the county jail, the jailer can stick him in the far cell with the overgrown bear of a man and leave this pervert alone with him as he goes "for a cup of coffee" with a wink and a nod to seal the deal. And then they can accidentally have him housed in a facility for violent offenders while he awaits trial. Yes this "off the books justice" is looking swell.

I'm with you on all of that. The problem with lawless '' justice '' isn't just that it often goes too far, or gets the wrong person.
It's that violence often breeds violence.
If someone gave me that kind of beating, even if I HAD been peeping, I'd make sure that they paid in kind. Even if it took years, I'd make them suffer far worse than I did. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

And as for the jail bit, from what I've read, it was his treatment in jail that drove Charles Manson to do what he did.
It was revenge on '' society '' for what happened to him in jail.
And I'm sure that HE'S not the only one.

Oh bullshit. Charles Manson is a psychopath who trots out any excuse he thinks might make the parole board sympathetic so they will let him out.