Author Topic: A punishment to fit the crime  (Read 1433 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

October 24, 2016, 08:08:04 PM

Offline vile8r

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

We make fantasies about it, but in the real world, I think this punishment fits the crime!

December 10, 2016, 05:39:50 PM
Reply #1

Offline brokenwing

The irony though is as the article discusses the one father from California getting over 1000 years for raping his teen daughter it also mentioned a similar case where a father from Montana got a 30 year suspended sentence and had to serve 60 days in jail and the judge even gave him credit for time served.

So I guess if you want to rape your pre-teen daughter move to Montana. 

December 10, 2016, 09:52:21 PM
Reply #2

Offline vile8r

It is inconsistencies like that in the justice system, that drive me crazy. It happens that way in Canada too.

For example: a drunk driver runs into a car, killing 3 teen boys. He gets like 30 months in jail, not even one year per kid he killed. He's released in like 18 months. Why? Oh because of the old "credit for time served awaiting trial" bullshit.

THEN......a man and woman are sentenced to FIVE years each for plotting to kill their respective spouses. And they weren't even really plotting. A police officer testifying at the trial, said there was no solid evidence that they were actually going to kill their spouses, just that they had talked about it and sent a few texts back and forth. One of the woman's kids had discovered one of the texts and had reported it to police.

The investigating officer even testified that during questioning, the woman said she had absolutely no intention of killing anyone and the officer said he figured she was very sincere and was simply joking around.

Now I realize, talking about killing someone is not exactly something to take lightly. But how many times have you and I said to ourselves, "Fuck I hate that asshole! I wanna kill him!" Am I going to get sent to jail for five years for having that thought?

Because basically that is what the judge decided.

So buddy who kills 3 young people in a drunk driving crash, barely gets a year and a half in jail. Two people, perhaps not using the best discretion, each get 5 YEARS for just talking about wanting to kill somebody, and may or may not have been serious about it?

Now where's the consistency in that????

December 11, 2016, 02:22:55 AM
Reply #3

Offline Jed

The disparity often seems to be a show of remorse or just courtroom behavior.  Now remorse I get, when giving a lighter sentence (slightly lighter sentence).  But some judges seem to get pissed off at some defendants, for not taking plea deals or just take a dislike to them.  Or conversely, take a liking to them and give a ridiculously light sentence.

The sad thing is most men never end up in a courtroom for raping their own daughter.  Most get away with it.