Jump to content
CrazyBoards.org

Guy Got Sentenced Yesterday


Recommended Posts

the guy responsible for raping another girl and me and attempting to kidnap a third was sentenced yesterday. he got all these counts with 2 years on each count, but unfortunately is serving them concurrently, so he'll only be in the slammer for 2 years ;):). however, then he gets deported back to his crappy native land where no one wants to go or live, so that's some justice. just the deportation alone is justice. unfortunately, then he is free to do the same things to the women in his country. hopefully they have more arcane laws than we do here and will take more active measures against sex offenders than we do here. what's 2 years in one of our prisons? we have to live with what happened forever. he just gets 2 years and deportation.

concurrent sentences are a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

concurrent sentences are a joke.

I agree! 2 yrs for rape?? I hope he'll experience the "joy" of being raped every day for those two years.

I hope he's not being deported to Mexico, because he'll come right back through our porous borders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunno where the country is, but those that tend to have arcane laws, well, they don't tend to care about what happens to women.

It doesn't matter if he's deported to mexico--he simply needs to get there to get back in. Or Canada.

Finally, to wish rape (in prison or otherwise) on anyone is just...sick. If it's wrong to rape an innocent woman, it's still wrong to rape a guilty man. Anybody that wishes so is a sick fuck (and this is coming from me, you understand) and they should get just what they wish for. Golden rule and all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

concurrent sentences are a joke.

It is true. An equivalent of 6 years turning into just 2 for two rapes and an attempted kidnapping is not exactly what I would call justice. I'm sorry, loon.

Dunno where the country is, but those that tend to have arcane laws, well, they don't tend to care about what happens to women.

Unfortunately, CNS makes an extremely good point.

I'm sorry about the result loon.

Be well and take care of yourself.

~*Ophelia*~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 years? Damn, he'll most likely be out in 6 months for "good behavior." With mandatory drug laws, violent crime sentences get shorter. There is just no room left in the prisons.

Hopefully, karma will kick his ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to step in and ask that people stop the arguing about who has what right to judge.

That's all I'm asking.

Yeah, it sucks and I don't think it's right. But that's the judgement that got handed down. And instead of bitching about it, lobby against it if you don't think it's right. That's the reason why things don't change. Because people don't do anything to change them. They sit around and bitch to others about it, but they don't bitch to the RIGHT people. Mainly because they've given up. You can't give up. The only way to make change is to force it sometimes.

That's all I'm going to write on the subject. Just please try not to fight on who deserves to be raped or not. In my view, no one does. It's the most horrific thing that will ever scar you. And I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who do you think should do the raping of the people who've raped? Do you have in mind just the state turning a blind eye to rape occurring in its prisons (but only for convicted rapists)? Or some kind of state/federal employee thing? Will those people have to be raped in turn because they've raped someone, or do they get excused because they're raping for the state/the nation/justice? How about gender - do you want people to be raped by a person of a gender that would make them most uncomfortable? What if the person getting raped isn't bothered by it - if the idea is to make them as traumatized as the person they raped, and they're not as bothered by it, should we add extra humiliation? If they're bothered more by it, is the excess trauma justified in the name of justice? If it is, then why are we calibrating it to the original victim's amount of trauma - why don't we just go all out? If they get out and are too traumatized to work, are you ok with funding their disability check with your tax dollars? If not, should they be excluded from the option to receive disability?

How are you going to recruit people to be state-sponsored rapists - do you necessarily want the people who would apply for the job? If someone hadn't actually committed the rape they were sentenced for, and they get raped by a state rapist, and then it gets found out they hadn't committed the rape they were sentenced for, does the state-sponsored rape suddenly become a bad thing, and do they have the option to cause revenge by ensuring that the people who caused their rape get raped? (I'm not necessarily talking about the professional who raped them; it could be the people who sued them, or the witnesses who misidentified them.)

How about we apply the same thing to people who've committed other violent crimes? People who've been stabbed should be stabbed (who's going to pay for their medical care?). People who've physically abused should be forced to receive physical abuse to an equivalent degree for an equivalent period of time.

Maybe we could extend this to other abuse that isn't violent? If it's caused the same or greater degree of harm, I don't see any reason not to. People who are abusively controlling should be abusively controlled, to a similar degree and for a similar period of time. People who verbally abuse should be forced to listen to verbal abuse. We could probably even extend that to people who cause sufficient distress in others, like people with untreated personality disorders. I've got a couple people on my list who deserve a lot of pain - who made my life hell for big chunks of time - and probably aren't getting the pain they really should get. I'd love for other taxpayers to help pay for that, and I'd love for my own personal desires for vengeance to be not just legitimated but facilitated by society. I even know some people who are just aggravating who I'd love to have to be as upset as I am about what's happening to them. And that's just assuming that we're going for equal subjective punishment - if it's ok to punish more heavily, hell, let's go for it. In fact, how about everyone who annoys me gets harassed by government employees. It won't make anything better - in fact, it will probably make them more resentful toward me and more interested in exacting revenge on their own part, and probably to a greater degree than I exacted on them, and then I'll have to exact even more vengeance on them, etc. - but it would be satisfying on some level.

If you're going to commit seriously to the notion that the answer to rape is more rape, don't go halfway. I don't think it's as straightforward as you think it may be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this bypasses the fact that in the American criminal justice system punishment serves many purposes which are often contradictory:

Prevention - if someone is scared of punishment, they will be less likely to commit a crime

retribution - eye for an eye, etc.

rehabilitation - let's help the one-eyed man see more clearly once we are done with the prison rape

protection - removal of the dangerous individuals from society so they can't hurt anyone else (until we let them go with HIV, one eye, and an AA degree)

We need to get our heads on right about what the purpose is of punitive action and get politicians to quit passing self-contradictory bills just to win votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I suppose the judge looked at it this way: put the guy in prison for a couple years and then boot him out of the country. It's not the USA's responsibility to protect his native country from crimes he hasn't yet committed. Besides, why should the US taxpayers foot the bill for say 10 years of imprisonment when we can just be rid of him.

Contact the prosecutors office about the status of your case. He is the one making the decisions.

good luck.

a.m. (who hasn't been raped but is still entitled to an opinion)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that is is RIDICULOUS to say that someone who hasn't been raped isn't entitled to an opinion about justice and retribution. I've been raped, but it doesn't make me some kind of expert on deciding whether to victimize criminals. I think Liveoak and others similar opinions are just plain silly.

I found the experience of rape horrific, and would never wish it on anyone, even my rapist. I think the rape not only damaged me, but also my rapist, whether he knows or admits it, raping someone else makes you incapable of truly liking or respecting yourself on a fundamental level, and it dehumanizes you as well as your victim. I don't think people should be encouraged or cheered on to victimize and abuse others in prison. I don't subscribe to an eye for an eye, I'm too evolved for revenge. I'd rather live in a world where we incarcerated people in humane conditions and taught them how to relate to people in future without abusing them, if that is possible. The state needs to decide fair punishment that will result in less crime in future, IMHO. If I were a convicted rapist who was sexually abused in prison, I'd likely come out feeling angry and shamed and determined to inflict that sexual abuse on someone else. It's totally counterproductive to send out a message that rape is okay EVER.

But then, I have a concept of grace. Am I angry that I was raped? Sometimes? Do I think it was unjust? All the time. But I also want to get out from under the blanket of rage and have some peace of mind, and were I faced with my rapist, I like to think that I would look him the eye and be honest about my suffering, rather than being vengeful and violent. That would feel powerful to me. Just my take on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this whole mess has been bugging the crap outta me for a while now, but i wanted to get my mind straight before posting a response.

originally i felt the cns vs liveoak argument should be split off because it was detracting from Loon's original post, and seemed to be more of a personal battle than one that had anything to do with Loon's post. but, when i made the request to management, i got told essentially to piss off, and that maybe i should ask the one person who was causing the problem to stop posting. (well gee, who could you mean? cns? he *was* the one who threw the first punch. oh wait, mods are never ever wrong here.)

anyway, i fumed about that response for awhile, and now i am here to state my opinion on this mess.

first of all liveoak expressed her opinion on Loon's situation, and may i remind you there are many cultures and religions that believe in an eye for an eye justice. are you going to tell me that you are so omnipotent that you can definitively say that their cultures and religious beliefs are wrong? of course you are, because the level of egotism necessary to make such a statement is clearly exhibited by the people who have bristled to that point of view.

second, cns turned around and made liveoak's statement personal. maybe this speaks to an issue on his part that triggered him. but imnsho, i think it was out of line and inappropriate. in intellectual debate, one does not make their case by making it about personal attack. we all know that many if not all of the mods not only have a personal bias against some of the members here, but that when one makes a statement, the rest tow the party line and chime in supporting that initial opinion. united front. it's clearly shown in all the subsequent posts on this topic by mods.

QUOTE(liveoak @ Jul 21 2007, 08:25 PM)

cns, let me know how you feel about that after you've been raped. Otherwise, you're not qualified to judge.

You steppin' bitch? I've stepped to harder.

i don't even know what this response means. but then, i am an old lady not up on current lingo. i could be wrong, but it sure sounds threatening in nature. again, inappropriate. maybe cns should ask himself why this issue is pushing his buttons so hard.

but. the fact remains that NO MAN can speak to the experience of a woman's rape, and is therefore, not in a position to judge a woman's response to said offense. i don't care how enlightened or feministic a man might be, how deeply in touch with his female side he is. he has never lived as a woman, under all the judgment and stereotypes that the world places on us and under which we must struggle every day. you can't know what it's like. and that's what i saw in liveoak's comment. simply saying you can't know what it's like for a woman to be raped. certainly you can have and be entitled to expressing an opinion on the subject, but that you really are in no position to judge a woman for her opinions, because you will never know what it's like. and might i add that you should be eternally grateful for this. as a white man, you are the chosen elite in our culture, and no matter how much you may object to the contrary, you stand in the singular position of priviledge which is inherently isolating, and precludes you from having a full understanding of the experiences of those outside your group.

as usual people are reading into live oak's words their own biases and opinions and twisting them to suit their agenda. i am sure i am doing the same. it's human nature.

but what i am asking for here is an end to personal attack. politics and religion. two subjects it has long been said should not be discussed in polite company, and this thread is exactly why. morals play a part in both, and people are passionate about their morals. its difficult to maintain a cool head and discuss the real issues from a position of objectivity and clarity.

i don't know what a 20/50 is. we haven't all been so fortunate to have the experience and subsequent knowledge that you have cns, therefore you might want to explain further for the general populace. but if it was a sexual assault, then i see why you have taken this so personally. just remember, when you said:

Finally, to wish rape (in prison or otherwise) on anyone is just...sick. If it's wrong to rape an innocent woman, it's still wrong to rape a guilty man. Anybody that wishes so is a sick fuck (and this is coming from me, you understand) and they should get just what they wish for. Golden rule and all that.

by your own circular logic, by wishing the same to befall the wisher, you have actually wished rape upon yourself.

i will say that i think the "pansies" here would be the justice system of this country and they need to step up to the plate and stop being pushed around by the tree-hugging liberals who want to save all the really "sick fucks" out there. way too many criminals just wind up back out on the streets soon after their crimes, ready, willing, and able to repeat the very crimes that put them into prison in the first place. and they do. i believe the whole system needs a thorough going over not to mention a total overhaul. criminals should be learning the lesson of: "do not repeat your crime or you will pay." and if eye for an eye justice is what it takes to teach them this lesson, then i am right there in support of it. further, i believe perpetrators of violent crimes (and as rape is an act of violence having nothing to do with sex, it does fall into this category, as do all crimes against children as far as i am concerned) should be executed. no i didn't stutter and yes that's what i meant. my principal used to say "you abuse the privilege, you lose the privilege." and seeing as how violent criminals have indicated they are unable to participate in the world without acting violently against it, then they should be removed from it once and for all, before they hurt even more innocent victims. maybe if this were the case folks would be less apt to thumb their noses at the system that fails the innocent, and favors the guilty time and again.

in closing, i want to say two things:

1. don't bother trying to convince me otherwise on any of this. you're entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to mine, and the stuff we are talking about here is ingrained to my core. so slam me, flame me, call me a sick fuck and an asshole. i really don't care. these are my heartfelt beliefs. and i really could not care less what you think about them. besides, i'm thinking if you all just were to see things my way the world would be a far far better place. <grin>

2. it is apparent over and over and over again that the management here simply don't like certain members of this here joint. and it winds up invariably causing arguments, strife, ugliness and pain. why then don't y'all just ban those ya don't like? (i have given up on contacting mgmt directly, all i get back is big snark, and other assorted attitude, so i pose the question here.) after all, don't the TOS say something like the rules are don't be an asshole, and we get to define what an asshole is because this is our universe and we are its overlords? i know you all don't like me, whatever. sometimes it's frustrating, and frequently annoying, but it's not usually a whole lot more than that. i used to think at least Maddy liked me, but i'm thinking even that one is no longer the case. that's ok. we all know there are certain past and present members who just irritate the hell out of me for no real reason other than they rub me the wrong way. so, i get that can certainly be true for others. what i don't get is why you continue to jump on the shit of certain people over and over again, like the above interchange between liveoak vs. the mods? is it that you're simply entertained by being able to do so, and you keep us around fopr your amusement? i would looooooooooooove to understand this. but i am certainly not holding my breath on getting any kind of feedback other than the usual "piss off" even if that comes as simply deleting the post for being off topic or some other lame excuse of the moment.

ok, i've said my piece. you're dismissed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i know you all don't like me, whatever. sometimes it's frustrating, and frequently annoying, but it's not usually a whole lot more than that. i used to think at least Maddy liked me, but i'm thinking even that one is no longer the case. that's ok. we all know there are certain past and present members who just irritate the hell out of me for no real reason other than they rub me the wrong way. so, i get that can certainly be true for others. what i don't get is why you continue to jump on the shit of certain people over and over again, like the above interchange between liveoak vs. the mods? is it that you're simply entertained by being able to do so, and you keep us around fopr your amusement? i would looooooooooooove to understand this. but i am certainly not holding my breath on getting any kind of feedback other than the usual "piss off" even if that comes as simply deleting the post for being off topic or some other lame excuse of the moment.

ok, i've said my piece. you're dismissed.

It's not a matter of like or dislike. I decided not to split the topic because it was (1) relevant to forum that it was posted in, (2) Loon didn't contact us stating that she was upset by it, (3) I was not under the impression that you were acting as a third party under Loon's direction to have the thread split.

I don't work under like or dislike when it comes to board matters. I can't do that. You didn't make a logical argument. I base my decisions on logic.

It's true that I have very deep personality conflicts with most of humanity, but I don't allow that to interfere with my board decisions. Personal cannot interfere with board. I think I made that abundantly clear when we almost lost the board.

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for the record Maddy, my statement about you was a general one ... not specifically related to this matter.

and regarding the split request i did not offer an argument so one cannot say it was logical or illogical. i offered a suggestion.

but i do pose these questions to your logic:

1: does a personal attack against an individual who expressed her opinion really qualify as relevant?

2: do you really think that a woman who has been raped would be the first person to step up in a situation that was turning ugly? perhaps she would be and i do not know Loon well enough to say what is true in her case, but i do KNOW that oftentimes in the case of rape victims they are the very LAST people to stand up for themselves in a situation that is upsetting to them.

and make this statement

3: nor should you have been as i was not

my closing point 2 has nothing to do with my original request and has everything to do with the gang mentality evidenced against those the mods do not care for, and my lack of understanding as to why it continues.

Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...