Crime and Punishment: How can you decide?
- Thread starter Shimmer
- Start date
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
Both stories are so sad. The first one, maximum sentence; stories about people cutting open pregnant women seem especially cruel to me.
For the second, I'd want to see how much of a mental health issue she had and the circumstancese around it. I'm frankly a little suspicious, because the behaviors the lawyer described sound so stereotypical of someone who's crazy. If she actively chose not to take her medicine, she deserves a harsher sentence than a mental hospital.
For the second, I'd want to see how much of a mental health issue she had and the circumstancese around it. I'm frankly a little suspicious, because the behaviors the lawyer described sound so stereotypical of someone who's crazy. If she actively chose not to take her medicine, she deserves a harsher sentence than a mental hospital.
Another Janice!
Well-known member
E Stl. is literally a 10 minute drive from here. Yes, it is completely horrible, but what is really sad is that town is so corrupt, violent, and poverty stricken that this type of thing happens all the time there and we are so used to it that all we really do anymore is shake our heads and say "what a shame".
Seriously. Look up "East St. Louis" in Wikipedia.
From the stories I have heard, these women were apparrently cousins. The woman who did this should get death. I have zero use/sympathy for anyone who hurts a child. The local reports are also saying that the children's bodies were hidden in a washer and dryer.
As for the other woman, who drowned her kids in the bay....well, I understand that some people are just "crazy" and do horrible things. Then they try to get off by pleading innocent by insanity. Fine, whatever....but they are not innocent. They are basically saying "I am guilty of this crime, but I am crazy, so it can't (shouldn't) be held against me. Whatever. You still committed murder. You know you committed murder. Why isn't there a plea/verdict of guilt by insanity?
Quote:
I agree. What's the movie....Analyze This I think it was. Robert Deniro acts like he's catatonic (sp) so that he can be released under a doctors care. Yes, it was a movie, but hey, who knows?
Seriously. Look up "East St. Louis" in Wikipedia.
From the stories I have heard, these women were apparrently cousins. The woman who did this should get death. I have zero use/sympathy for anyone who hurts a child. The local reports are also saying that the children's bodies were hidden in a washer and dryer.
As for the other woman, who drowned her kids in the bay....well, I understand that some people are just "crazy" and do horrible things. Then they try to get off by pleading innocent by insanity. Fine, whatever....but they are not innocent. They are basically saying "I am guilty of this crime, but I am crazy, so it can't (shouldn't) be held against me. Whatever. You still committed murder. You know you committed murder. Why isn't there a plea/verdict of guilt by insanity?
Quote:
| I'm frankly a little suspicious, because the behaviors the lawyer described sound so stereotypical of someone who's crazy. |
I agree. What's the movie....Analyze This I think it was. Robert Deniro acts like he's catatonic (sp) so that he can be released under a doctors care. Yes, it was a movie, but hey, who knows?
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
Quote:
If the prescribing doctor believed she was coherent enough to know to administer her own medicine and directly told a family member to make sure about it, no. She should take the blame entirely. If someone was given the responsibility to monitor her medicine intake, that party should receive a decently harsh sentence, depending upon how severe s/he was aware of the situation.
Quote:
Fiction usually draws from some truth. Knowing some of the crap people try to pull just so they won't get fired or reprimanded, I wouldn't be surprised if someone pulled off an act just to avoid jail.
| If there's guilt by insanity, should the family/husband be held responsible, as she wasn't taking her medication? |
If the prescribing doctor believed she was coherent enough to know to administer her own medicine and directly told a family member to make sure about it, no. She should take the blame entirely. If someone was given the responsibility to monitor her medicine intake, that party should receive a decently harsh sentence, depending upon how severe s/he was aware of the situation.
Quote:
| I agree. What's the movie....Analyze This I think it was. Robert Deniro acts like he's catatonic (sp) so that he can be released under a doctors care. Yes, it was a movie, but hey, who knows? |
Fiction usually draws from some truth. Knowing some of the crap people try to pull just so they won't get fired or reprimanded, I wouldn't be surprised if someone pulled off an act just to avoid jail.
Raerae
Well-known member
Ugh...
I dont know what to say on these... I saw this on Friday, and was really turned off by it... Well the preggo woman one anyways (so sad).
I'm torn both ways... The death penalty seems harsh, seems like the ultimate punishment. But I often feel like they are getting off too easy. Obviously people end up in jail for a really long time before, but still.
And any sort of punishment that would seem appropriate, is always deemed cruel and unusual. Granted the people deserving of these crimes didn't consider the acts they committed on other people cruel and unusual.
I think that, that is one failing of our legal system. We are always easier on the people comitting the crimes, than the criminal was on their victims. Take child molestors, we seperate them from the normal jail populations so that they wont be hurt by the jail community. Dont want them getting raped in jail, that would be cruel. Dont want them getting killed in jail, that woulnd't be fair. Yet the victims of these molestors, young children, are left scared for life, or are buried in the ground.
Why can't they give people life in solitary confinement. In a cell with no windows. A mattress, and a toilet. With instructions from the guards who give them food, to not say anything to them. No contact with anyone else they can hurt, and a lifetime to reflect on the horrible thing(s) they did in life.
I dont know what to say on these... I saw this on Friday, and was really turned off by it... Well the preggo woman one anyways (so sad).
I'm torn both ways... The death penalty seems harsh, seems like the ultimate punishment. But I often feel like they are getting off too easy. Obviously people end up in jail for a really long time before, but still.
And any sort of punishment that would seem appropriate, is always deemed cruel and unusual. Granted the people deserving of these crimes didn't consider the acts they committed on other people cruel and unusual.
I think that, that is one failing of our legal system. We are always easier on the people comitting the crimes, than the criminal was on their victims. Take child molestors, we seperate them from the normal jail populations so that they wont be hurt by the jail community. Dont want them getting raped in jail, that would be cruel. Dont want them getting killed in jail, that woulnd't be fair. Yet the victims of these molestors, young children, are left scared for life, or are buried in the ground.
Why can't they give people life in solitary confinement. In a cell with no windows. A mattress, and a toilet. With instructions from the guards who give them food, to not say anything to them. No contact with anyone else they can hurt, and a lifetime to reflect on the horrible thing(s) they did in life.
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
Indeed, but once a person reaches the point of being dangerous, isn't it incumbent upon those surrounding that individual to alert the appropriate authorities, with or without that person's permission?
OR~
If that person recognizes that the individual is a danger to those around her, and continues to allow that individual to have sole care and custody of children, should the person allowing the alleged offender be held accountable at all?
| Originally Posted by Beauty Mark If the prescribing doctor believed she was coherent enough to know to administer her own medicine and directly told a family member to make sure about it, no. She should take the blame entirely. If someone was given the responsibility to monitor her medicine intake, that party should receive a decently harsh sentence, depending upon how severe s/he was aware of the situation. Fiction usually draws from some truth. Knowing some of the crap people try to pull just so they won't get fired or reprimanded, I wouldn't be surprised if someone pulled off an act just to avoid jail. |
Indeed, but once a person reaches the point of being dangerous, isn't it incumbent upon those surrounding that individual to alert the appropriate authorities, with or without that person's permission?
OR~
If that person recognizes that the individual is a danger to those around her, and continues to allow that individual to have sole care and custody of children, should the person allowing the alleged offender be held accountable at all?
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
These two instances are when the death penalty is just appropriate in my eyes.
But that's just me.
Everything else unnecessarily costs money.
And, IMO, there's no reason the death penalty should cost more than 250 bucks + burial.
| Originally Posted by Raerae Ugh... I dont know what to say on these... I saw this on Friday, and was really turned off by it... Well the preggo woman one anyways (so sad). I'm torn both ways... The death penalty seems harsh, seems like the ultimate punishment. But I often feel like they are getting off too easy. Obviously people end up in jail for a really long time before, but still. And any sort of punishment that would seem appropriate, is always deemed cruel and unusual. Granted the people deserving of these crimes didn't consider the acts they committed on other people cruel and unusual. I think that, that is one failing of our legal system. We are always easier on the people comitting the crimes, than the criminal was on their victims. Take child molestors, we seperate them from the normal jail populations so that they wont be hurt by the jail community. Dont want them getting raped in jail, that would be cruel. Dont want them getting killed in jail, that woulnd't be fair. Yet the victims of these molestors, young children, are left scared for life, or are buried in the ground. Why can't they give people life in solitary confinement. In a cell with no windows. A mattress, and a toilet. With instructions from the guards who give them food, to not say anything to them. No contact with anyone else they can hurt, and a lifetime to reflect on the horrible thing(s) they did in life. |
These two instances are when the death penalty is just appropriate in my eyes.
But that's just me.
Everything else unnecessarily costs money.
And, IMO, there's no reason the death penalty should cost more than 250 bucks + burial.
Lady_MAC
Well-known member
Quote:
I see what you're saying, but to be guilty, you must know that you have done something wrong. We leaned in law that there is no crime without actus reus + mens rea, meaning that while there may have been an act, there is no guilty mind.
When you think about it, many of them are not getting off (unless we're talking temporary insanity). They get shoved in an insane asylum, which isn't all that much better.
| Originally Posted by Another Janice! As for the other woman, who drowned her kids in the bay....well, I understand that some people are just "crazy" and do horrible things. Then they try to get off by pleading innocent by insanity. Fine, whatever....but they are not innocent. They are basically saying "I am guilty of this crime, but I am crazy, so it can't (shouldn't) be held against me. Whatever. You still committed murder. You know you committed murder. Why isn't there a plea/verdict of guilt by insanity? |
I see what you're saying, but to be guilty, you must know that you have done something wrong. We leaned in law that there is no crime without actus reus + mens rea, meaning that while there may have been an act, there is no guilty mind.
When you think about it, many of them are not getting off (unless we're talking temporary insanity). They get shoved in an insane asylum, which isn't all that much better.
Lady_MAC
Well-known member
Quote:
Cruel and unusual punishment.. illegal. That's why.
| Originally Posted by Raerae Why can't they give people life in solitary confinement. In a cell with no windows. A mattress, and a toilet. With instructions from the guards who give them food, to not say anything to them. No contact with anyone else they can hurt, and a lifetime to reflect on the horrible thing(s) they did in life. |
Cruel and unusual punishment.. illegal. That's why.
Raerae
Well-known member
Quote:
it's not that I dont support the death penalty. I just think in many ways it's letting them off too easy.
I'm dont believe that after death they are going to go to a eternity in hell, so while they may no longer be living, they are spared a misrible existance.
And I think there are plenty of ways where people could be made misrible and forced to reflect on their actions for another 50+ years of their lives without it being cruel and unusual.
I think prison is too cushy right now as it is. It defeneteley doesn't serve as enough of a deterant considering the amount of incarcerated individuals. In some cases I bet prison is a improvement on some people's lives, sadly as that is.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer These two instances are when the death penalty is just appropriate in my eyes. But that's just me. Everything else unnecessarily costs money. And, IMO, there's no reason the death penalty should cost more than 250 bucks + burial. |
it's not that I dont support the death penalty. I just think in many ways it's letting them off too easy.
I'm dont believe that after death they are going to go to a eternity in hell, so while they may no longer be living, they are spared a misrible existance.
And I think there are plenty of ways where people could be made misrible and forced to reflect on their actions for another 50+ years of their lives without it being cruel and unusual.
I think prison is too cushy right now as it is. It defeneteley doesn't serve as enough of a deterant considering the amount of incarcerated individuals. In some cases I bet prison is a improvement on some people's lives, sadly as that is.
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
I always want to make the worst criminals work in sweatshop-like conditions, making something and possibly getting a sweatshop-like payment, but it's considered cruel and unusual. Go figure.
Quote:
If the person is being seen as behaving dangerously (talking about committing a crime, for instance), any party who hear about it should inform the police and make sure the individuals who could be affected are safe. If you don't act, I believe you should be held accountable. To what extent, I'm not sure. It would depend on how much you knew about the person's state and what extent the crime was being discussed. Like there's a difference between a friend saying "I could kill my boss sometimes" not seriously and me actually seeing said friend buy a weapon to kill the boss or knowing the friend has a violent history or mental illness.
I know you can't hold the tourists accountable, but it kind of sickens me that no one tried to stop her. If I saw something like that happen, I'd at least call the police.
Quote:
| Indeed, but once a person reaches the point of being dangerous, isn't it incumbent upon those surrounding that individual to alert the appropriate authorities, with or without that person's permission? OR~ If that person recognizes that the individual is a danger to those around her, and continues to allow that individual to have sole care and custody of children, should the person allowing the alleged offender be held accountable at all? |
If the person is being seen as behaving dangerously (talking about committing a crime, for instance), any party who hear about it should inform the police and make sure the individuals who could be affected are safe. If you don't act, I believe you should be held accountable. To what extent, I'm not sure. It would depend on how much you knew about the person's state and what extent the crime was being discussed. Like there's a difference between a friend saying "I could kill my boss sometimes" not seriously and me actually seeing said friend buy a weapon to kill the boss or knowing the friend has a violent history or mental illness.
I know you can't hold the tourists accountable, but it kind of sickens me that no one tried to stop her. If I saw something like that happen, I'd at least call the police.
Shimmer
Well-known member
Do you really trust someone who has the capacity to commit such heinous crimes to perform work in an acceptable manner? At least, any work that is truly beneficial to society?
And, when is the murder of four children a debt t hat can be worked off? When is that debt repaid?
And, when is the murder of four children a debt t hat can be worked off? When is that debt repaid?
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
I don't think the debt can ever be paid off, death penalty or not. I just sometimes feel that death penalty for some people is an easy sentence. You have your life taken away from you, which is a big deal for many people, but at the same time, if jail were harsher, death would be a blessing compared to life in jail.
I have no kind of work in mind, I just really would rather know these people had to suffer somehow than hoping that they go hell.
I have no kind of work in mind, I just really would rather know these people had to suffer somehow than hoping that they go hell.
macluver
Well-known member
The death penalty, to me, is an easy way out. There is no suffering. What these murderers did was horrendous. Physical torture is illegal, but these people should be in solitary confinement, with pictures of the people they killed. They shouldn't be tortured, even emotionally, but I still believe that such horrible killers shouldn't be allowed around the rest of society. Ever again. There is NO excuse for what they did.
