That's the problem. Innocent people are mixed in with the guilty ones.
Obama disagrees with high court on child rape case
- Thread starter Socrtease
- Start date
That's the problem. Innocent people are mixed in with the guilty ones.
evince
Truthmatters
He has to take this position to get elected.
I am willing to bet he deep down knows this is the right decision.
Americans just dont think this one through at the drop of a hat. Its a knee jerk issue. We are four months out and the machines are still being used in this election.
Please people cut him a little slack to do the stupid fucking game so he CAN get elected.
I am willing to bet he deep down knows this is the right decision.
Americans just dont think this one through at the drop of a hat. Its a knee jerk issue. We are four months out and the machines are still being used in this election.
Please people cut him a little slack to do the stupid fucking game so he CAN get elected.
First let me say, I agree with you that we should abolish the death penalty.
However....
The attempt to equate the rape of a child with all rape is pretensive.
Raping the most innocent among us is more heinous than raping somebody less so. Just as killing the most innocent is more heinous than killing well, the next door neighbor who raped your daughter.
It is impossible to reflect on law without understanding mitigating factors. Pretending such factors cannot exist when making laws or setting punishments is just that, pretense.
You just wrote the key words; DNA exonerated him. It’s been specifically stated I think, that we have to have DNA evidence, to convict. Along with other things; forensics, videotapes, confessions (yes I know that those can be troubling, sometimes).
You’re bringing up a case of a 14 year old. What about the infant who is raped, torn apart, literally, and might never have a normal sex life, will definitely never have children? I’m sorry but, saying that all rape is heinous, doesn’t cover this.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
R. Kelly raped a 12 year old girl .. got it on tape .. I've seen it .. after he had sex with her, he pissed in her mouth .. got off won't do a day in jail.
Our system of "justice" is all fucked up.
But had he been convicted, should he be murdered by the state?
The girl was wiling/paid for .. but all sex with minors is rape.
Should R. Kelly fry?
Keep in mind it wasn't his first, second, or tenth sexual encounters with children.
He was screwing Aaliyah before she was 13 .. married her when she was 15.
Fry him?
Our system of "justice" is all fucked up.
But had he been convicted, should he be murdered by the state?
The girl was wiling/paid for .. but all sex with minors is rape.
Should R. Kelly fry?
Keep in mind it wasn't his first, second, or tenth sexual encounters with children.
He was screwing Aaliyah before she was 13 .. married her when she was 15.
Fry him?
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Exactly .. and the courts aren't very good and determining which is which.
evince
Truthmatters
It seems to me that a case such as that one could also be charged as attempted murder.
They are horrible but yet just the charge rape should not be a death penalty for reason of protection for future victims safety.
Less so? I don't agree with that. If you're not compliant its still extremely heinous and both parties are innocent. Saying someone is less innocent when they are forced into unsolicited acts marginalizes their suffering.
Not if the person happen to have consensual relations with a person before they were raped.
I should have specified; I'm talking more in terms of child rape.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
You're wrong brother.
Countless cases
Those exonerated by DNA testing aren’t the only people who have been wrongfully convicted in recent decades. For every case that involves DNA, there are thousands that do not.
Only a fraction of criminal cases involve biological evidence that can be subjected to DNA testing, and even when such evidence exists, it is often lost or destroyed after a conviction. Since they don’t have access to a definitive test like DNA, many wrongfully convicted people have a slim chance of ever proving their innocence.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/
The Innocence Project .. those are pople who know what they're talking about.
Additionally, DNA evidence has been rejected by many prosecutors across the country .. not because it isn't ironclad proff of guilt or innocence .. but because it is. They value their conviction rates more than they value justice.
I really couldn’t say. That’s why we have trials; to get all of the information, circumstances, and evidence out.
Again, I’m not for the death penalty in the cases of child rape, but I just don’t feel that’s it’s necessarily an indefensible position to hold.
It is heinous, but less so. It is a mitigating factor.
Much like a prisoner raping a child molester in prison would be different than the molester raping your son or daughter.
(Again, this is not an argument that we should apply the death penalty, I am against the death penalty.)
You're comparisons are absurd.
The examples you give involve victims that did not provoke or do anything to warrant such actions versus getting retribution on a perp who's committed a heinus act.
The consequences of the rape can be much more severe. I gave examples. They shouldn’t be glossed over. Let me be clear, I despise all rapists. One of the stupidest things I hear, and I hear a lot of stupid shit in what I do, is; but it was a date rape. Oh, so you gained a woman’s trust first, and then you raped her. I am in no way soft on any sort of violence, most especially, sexual violence.
But, let’s try and keep in mind, if I’m raped this week, I might suffer a lot of shit resulting from that, but I won’t need reconstructive surgery, I will be able to return to a healthy sex life at some point, and it would not prevent me from having children.
charver
You lookin' at my pint?
I'm glad that this is a US website because you'd almost certainly be at risk of a libel suit over here.
I don't know the ins and outs of the law over there but please be careful, mate. I'd hate to see you being chased down the street by a pack of angry libel lawyers.
Which is what mitigating factors are about.
Somebody said that every rape is heinous. I agree with that. But they are not all equitable, it does not follow that if you allow for this penalty in particularly heinous cases that we must always allow it in every case.
The ability to understand such factors, to recognize that they exist, is what my argument was about. Pretending that the comparisons are "ludicrous" when it was my point that there is a broad range we need to consider is just more pretense and an attempt to attack the person rather than the argument. It is ludicrous to state that they are all the same and should be treated as such.
Not all rapes are equally heinous when you consider such factors.
I personally think date rape is worse because of the trust factor.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
I'm glad that this is a US website because you'd almost certainly be at risk of a libel suit over here.
I don't know the ins and outs of the law over there but please be careful, mate. I'd hate to see you being chased down the street by a pack of angry libel lawyers.
Nope, not a concern here.
In spite of the courts, OJ will always be considered guilt in the court of public opinion.
R. Kelly has a long track record of raping underage girls .. and the defense he used in this latest case is almost comical. He used the "Little Man" defense. Little Man was a goofy movie that attached the head of an adult to the body of a child.
That was Kelly's defense .. it was his head, but not his body.