Pakistani woman kills pedophile husband, makes him into soup

Recovering fund...
atheistSuperfan
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
Pakistani woman kills pedophile husband, makes him into soup

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/25/world/asia/pakistan-husband-stew/index.html?iref=obnetwork

 

Islamabad (CNN) -- A Pakistani woman is being held on suspicion of killing her husband, cutting him up and trying to cook the pieces, Karachi police said Friday.

Zainab Bibi, 32, was arrested in connection with the murder Tuesday of her husband Ahmad Abbas, police said.

Her 22-year-old nephew, Zaheer Ahmed, is accused of helping Bibi stab Abbas to death and carve his body into small pieces.

Police said she wanted to cook her husband's body parts so she could dispose of them without being caught.

Neighbors raised the alert when they detected a foul odor in the neighborhood, police said.

Pakistan's domestic satellite channel ARY News spoke to Bibi in the police station where she is being held in the southern city of Karachi.

In an interview broadcast late Thursday, she claimed to have killed her husband because he wanted a physical relationship with their daughter -- and said she did not regret her actions.

"I killed my husband before he dared to touch my daughter," she told ARY News.

Optimism is reality, pessimism is the fantasy that you know enough to be cynical


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13667
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
It has been always part of

It has been always part of our species evolution to protect our own young(not the young of others but within our own family or tribe)

As vile the prospect of what she accused him of was, I feel lucky to live in a country where AT LEAST you cannot be executed by proxy of mere accusation.

Having empathy for a victim should never in a civil society create a vigilante society. It is understandable that a parent would want to protect their child, but this was not the way to handle it. This is mere revenge, not containment.

Cases like this can lack physical evidence and teach kids to make false claims merely because they may not like an adult.

Nature of an accusation should never over ride our human ability to stick to facts to maximize the insurance to the society that someone does not get falsely harmed or jailed.

Revenge is not justice, it is merely an emotional reaction. In reality revenge does no good other than to satisfy the emotions of the one doing it. The best society can do in reality is to contain a criminal so that they cannot harm others.

This is what the west has gotten away from and when you look at the nations without this "revenge" mentality and no death penalty, they are more educated and less violent.

Since he was murdered we have no way to know what really happened and he had no way to counter any claim made because there was no court to defend him, no matter how understandable her reaction to protecting her kid was.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Recovering fund...
atheistSuperfan
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:It has been

Brian37 wrote:

It has been always part of our species evolution to protect our own young(not the young of others but within our own family or tribe)

As vile the prospect of what she accused him of was, I feel lucky to live in a country where AT LEAST you cannot be executed by proxy of mere accusation.

Having empathy for a victim should never in a civil society create a vigilante society. It is understandable that a parent would want to protect their child, but this was not the way to handle it. This is mere revenge, not containment.

Cases like this can lack physical evidence and teach kids to make false claims merely because they may not like an adult.

Nature of an accusation should never over ride our human ability to stick to facts to maximize the insurance to the society that someone does not get falsely harmed or jailed.

Revenge is not justice, it is merely an emotional reaction. In reality revenge does no good other than to satisfy the emotions of the one doing it. The best society can do in reality is to contain a criminal so that they cannot harm others.

This is what the west has gotten away from and when you look at the nations without this "revenge" mentality and no death penalty, they are more educated and less violent.

Since he was murdered we have no way to know what really happened and he had no way to counter any claim made because there was no court to defend him, no matter how understandable her reaction to protecting her kid was.

 

Well in this case I disagree - sure if he 'was' innocent then you'd be correct, but this is Pakistan, not the US, as in a country where a woman could likely be stoned to death for coming out against her molester.

Optimism is reality, pessimism is the fantasy that you know enough to be cynical


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
How odd. You know,

How odd.

 

You know, technically, the guy was never a paedophile. Not unless you're a time cop or something and know he was going to do something...

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13667
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Recovering fundamentalist

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

It has been always part of our species evolution to protect our own young(not the young of others but within our own family or tribe)

As vile the prospect of what she accused him of was, I feel lucky to live in a country where AT LEAST you cannot be executed by proxy of mere accusation.

Having empathy for a victim should never in a civil society create a vigilante society. It is understandable that a parent would want to protect their child, but this was not the way to handle it. This is mere revenge, not containment.

Cases like this can lack physical evidence and teach kids to make false claims merely because they may not like an adult.

Nature of an accusation should never over ride our human ability to stick to facts to maximize the insurance to the society that someone does not get falsely harmed or jailed.

Revenge is not justice, it is merely an emotional reaction. In reality revenge does no good other than to satisfy the emotions of the one doing it. The best society can do in reality is to contain a criminal so that they cannot harm others.

This is what the west has gotten away from and when you look at the nations without this "revenge" mentality and no death penalty, they are more educated and less violent.

Since he was murdered we have no way to know what really happened and he had no way to counter any claim made because there was no court to defend him, no matter how understandable her reaction to protecting her kid was.

 

Well in this case I disagree - sure if he 'was' innocent then you'd be correct, but this is Pakistan, not the US, as in a country where a woman could likely be stoned to death for coming out against her molester.

It wouldn't matter to me if the guy was caught on video molesting his kid. Trials and courts and a right to a defense is how civil society deals with crime. Pakistan has yet to fully catch up with rational thinking. The emotions of the mother while understandable does not justify her reaction. ESPECIALLY when he was not in the middle of the action at the time. During the fact is one thing, before the fact and after the fact is another.

Otherwise if you simply want to say "good for her", lets just scrap our western society of courts and kill people in public just because we don't like what they are accused of.

There was a video back in the 90s that floated around news tv stations after the story aired. While being an intern I got to see the unedited tape the networks sent to local stations.

In the video you see two investigators escorting an accused child molester through an airport, he was in handcuffs of course. Behind him in the background you saw a wall of pay phones in which you see a man hang up the phone. The man walks behind the three, puts a gun to the prisoner's head and blows his brains out. It turns out the accused had allegedly molested his boy(that of the shooter).

NOW again, while understandable, we can not live in a society that reacts like that. The accused had not been convicted. If we take that mentality eventually someone who really is innocent could get their head blown off for no reason. What can you say at that point "ooops"?

THAT is why we have courts and not public executions sole based on the nature of the charge. If you are going to even merely put someone in jail and take away their freedom, you damned will better take care to minimize bias and emotion. Otherwise all society becomes is a mob.

It cuts to the core of what kind of society we should want to live in. It cuts to the core of what we would want ourselves if falsely accused. It is a long term issue dealing with human rights in a collective society, not one case or one person.


 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
I understand your

I understand your rationalization, and for the most part I am a very rational and leveled person.  I do have my triggers, however, and my kids would be one of them.  I would have probably been that guy by the payphones, and the fact that he has not been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt wouldn't mean shit to me.  I'm going to quote Chris Rock here "I'm not saying I agree, but I understand".  

I think it is important to recognize the fact that we are human with all the failings that come with that, and be pragmatic about this.

 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13667
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote:I understand

Ktulu wrote:

I understand your rationalization, and for the most part I am a very rational and leveled person.  I do have my triggers, however, and my kids would be one of them.  I would have probably been that guy by the payphones, and the fact that he has not been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt wouldn't mean shit to me.  I'm going to quote Chris Rock here "I'm not saying I agree, but I understand".  

I think it is important to recognize the fact that we are human with all the failings that come with that, and be pragmatic about this.

 

We don't seem to be on different pages here. I too understand WHY he shot the accused. But that is short term thinking in a society that values rule of law and not mob rule, we cant collectively condone that even if we understand it.

I don't have kids myself, but I can tell you how I react when someone fucks with my mom . No one likes to see the people they love fucked with.

And I am quite sure even though he broke the law in doing it, he would not be treated like a murderer. I don't know what he was charged with, I am sure weapons charges and manslaughter and I am sure a jury would take sympathy because of what was done to the kid. But it still does not excuse his actions no matter how much we might understand them.

Again, it boils down to what kind of future society we want to live in. If we want to be free from trumped up charges or mob rule as a collective society, then we cannot condone his actions.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
At first I though it said

At first I though it said soap not soup and I thought she was legendary but now she is just someone who should be in jail.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13667
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
And like I said before. What

And like I said before. What if the guy didn't do it and it was merely the kid lying or someone getting the kid to lie to get even with the accused. You shoot him in that case and you have wrongful murdered someone who didn't do it.

There was a famous day care case in California where several adults were charged and falsely convicted on basis of a climate of fear created(most likely because of the famous cases like Adam Walsh, at the time) Because of the zealous society and bad police work, several of these people were jailed for almost two decades.

Now the other problem with that, is because of the bad police work, they did not filter out bias or allow the children to use their own words. The basically manipulated the kids with fear "You don't want the bad guy to get away, you do want to help us, you don't want to get in trouble for not telling us the truth(what we want to hear).

Now even if there were some lagit complaints the tainted evidence and bad tactics on the part of the police, if any one accusation may have been true, there would be no way to know it because of the horrible investigation. Whereas if the investigation had been done properly there would be no mistake and the guilty would stay in jail.

BUT the way the story actually played out none of the charges turned out to be true and all the kids when they grew up recanted. A climate of fear and mob rule caused that.

So my default position will always be to default to presumption of innocence and default to letting the guilty go free rather than risk one innocent person be harmed. It is an an attitude that keeps mob rule and government abuse at bey.

Until you are falsely accused of something it is hard for most to understand. I've told this story before nothing criminal. But still scary because I felt all alone surrounded by people who wanted to get even with me for simply being in the wrong spot at the wrong time and the stupidity of telling the truth.

I was at a private school. We were having a field day. The playground sat at the top of a hill with a sheer drop over looking the main road protected by a concrete wall with rails to prevent you from falling off the playground. A car went by and I saw the right front passenger tire kick up a rock in the road and ding the door. It was so loud and the guy must have seen the kids on the hill when he was passing, he assumed someone had thrown the rock.

He came into the parking lot, found our principle and made the accusation. Like a dumb ass I stepped in and told the principle what had actually happened. Neither believed me. As a result he pulled all the kids back to the cafeteria and wouldn't let us go back outside until I confessed to throwing a rock I did not throw.

Everyone in that school hated me from then on. I had no lawyer, no witnesses and no video and no one to believe me. Now, take that non criminal event and imagine what it would be like if you were falsely accused of a serious violent crime. That was just school.

So that is why I say it is not a good idea to react to the nature of a charge in that manor even if the reaction is understandable.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Recovering fund...
atheistSuperfan
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Recovering

Brian37 wrote:

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

It has been always part of our species evolution to protect our own young(not the young of others but within our own family or tribe)

As vile the prospect of what she accused him of was, I feel lucky to live in a country where AT LEAST you cannot be executed by proxy of mere accusation.

Having empathy for a victim should never in a civil society create a vigilante society. It is understandable that a parent would want to protect their child, but this was not the way to handle it. This is mere revenge, not containment.

Cases like this can lack physical evidence and teach kids to make false claims merely because they may not like an adult.

Nature of an accusation should never over ride our human ability to stick to facts to maximize the insurance to the society that someone does not get falsely harmed or jailed.

Revenge is not justice, it is merely an emotional reaction. In reality revenge does no good other than to satisfy the emotions of the one doing it. The best society can do in reality is to contain a criminal so that they cannot harm others.

This is what the west has gotten away from and when you look at the nations without this "revenge" mentality and no death penalty, they are more educated and less violent.

Since he was murdered we have no way to know what really happened and he had no way to counter any claim made because there was no court to defend him, no matter how understandable her reaction to protecting her kid was.

 

Well in this case I disagree - sure if he 'was' innocent then you'd be correct, but this is Pakistan, not the US, as in a country where a woman could likely be stoned to death for coming out against her molester.

It wouldn't matter to me if the guy was caught on video molesting his kid. Trials and courts and a right to a defense is how civil society deals with crime. Pakistan has yet to fully catch up with rational thinking. The emotions of the mother while understandable does not justify her reaction. ESPECIALLY when he was not in the middle of the action at the time. During the fact is one thing, before the fact and after the fact is another.

Otherwise if you simply want to say "good for her", lets just scrap our western society of courts and kill people in public just because we don't like what they are accused of.

There was a video back in the 90s that floated around news tv stations after the story aired. While being an intern I got to see the unedited tape the networks sent to local stations.

In the video you see two investigators escorting an accused child molester through an airport, he was in handcuffs of course. Behind him in the background you saw a wall of pay phones in which you see a man hang up the phone. The man walks behind the three, puts a gun to the prisoner's head and blows his brains out. It turns out the accused had allegedly molested his boy(that of the shooter).

NOW again, while understandable, we can not live in a society that reacts like that. The accused had not been convicted. If we take that mentality eventually someone who really is innocent could get their head blown off for no reason. What can you say at that point "ooops"?

THAT is why we have courts and not public executions sole based on the nature of the charge. If you are going to even merely put someone in jail and take away their freedom, you damned will better take care to minimize bias and emotion. Otherwise all society becomes is a mob.

It cuts to the core of what kind of society we should want to live in. It cuts to the core of what we would want ourselves if falsely accused. It is a long term issue dealing with human rights in a collective society, not one case or one person.

 

 

 

 

 

I disagree, personally I think if he had been caught on video molesting the kid he should have been made into stew meat while he was still breathing - "human rights" in the legal sense are overrated, especially when they defend the worst criminals out there - personally I would be totally in favor of anyone who kills someone caught on camera raping a kid to be instantly pardoned - that's the thing, many of the responses here might be "right" in theory, but I don't think any of you have been in her shoes, and if you were in her shoes, and decided to do things the "legal and ethical" way at the expense of your kid being raped, then that would make you almost as bad as him.

Plus what was her alternative? Go to the Pakistani police - yes, Pakistani. Also the article didn't make it clear whether he was killed because he mentioned wanting to rape his daughter, or whether she stopped him in the act.

Optimism is reality, pessimism is the fantasy that you know enough to be cynical


Recovering fund...
atheistSuperfan
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
Tapey wrote:At first I

Tapey wrote:

At first I though it said soap not soup and I thought she was legendary but now she is just someone who should be in jail.

How do you know she's a criminal and needs to be put in jail? She hasn't been through due process Eye-wink

Optimism is reality, pessimism is the fantasy that you know enough to be cynical


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13667
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Recovering fundamentalist

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

It has been always part of our species evolution to protect our own young(not the young of others but within our own family or tribe)

As vile the prospect of what she accused him of was, I feel lucky to live in a country where AT LEAST you cannot be executed by proxy of mere accusation.

Having empathy for a victim should never in a civil society create a vigilante society. It is understandable that a parent would want to protect their child, but this was not the way to handle it. This is mere revenge, not containment.

Cases like this can lack physical evidence and teach kids to make false claims merely because they may not like an adult.

Nature of an accusation should never over ride our human ability to stick to facts to maximize the insurance to the society that someone does not get falsely harmed or jailed.

Revenge is not justice, it is merely an emotional reaction. In reality revenge does no good other than to satisfy the emotions of the one doing it. The best society can do in reality is to contain a criminal so that they cannot harm others.

This is what the west has gotten away from and when you look at the nations without this "revenge" mentality and no death penalty, they are more educated and less violent.

Since he was murdered we have no way to know what really happened and he had no way to counter any claim made because there was no court to defend him, no matter how understandable her reaction to protecting her kid was.

 

Well in this case I disagree - sure if he 'was' innocent then you'd be correct, but this is Pakistan, not the US, as in a country where a woman could likely be stoned to death for coming out against her molester.

It wouldn't matter to me if the guy was caught on video molesting his kid. Trials and courts and a right to a defense is how civil society deals with crime. Pakistan has yet to fully catch up with rational thinking. The emotions of the mother while understandable does not justify her reaction. ESPECIALLY when he was not in the middle of the action at the time. During the fact is one thing, before the fact and after the fact is another.

Otherwise if you simply want to say "good for her", lets just scrap our western society of courts and kill people in public just because we don't like what they are accused of.

There was a video back in the 90s that floated around news tv stations after the story aired. While being an intern I got to see the unedited tape the networks sent to local stations.

In the video you see two investigators escorting an accused child molester through an airport, he was in handcuffs of course. Behind him in the background you saw a wall of pay phones in which you see a man hang up the phone. The man walks behind the three, puts a gun to the prisoner's head and blows his brains out. It turns out the accused had allegedly molested his boy(that of the shooter).

NOW again, while understandable, we can not live in a society that reacts like that. The accused had not been convicted. If we take that mentality eventually someone who really is innocent could get their head blown off for no reason. What can you say at that point "ooops"?

THAT is why we have courts and not public executions sole based on the nature of the charge. If you are going to even merely put someone in jail and take away their freedom, you damned will better take care to minimize bias and emotion. Otherwise all society becomes is a mob.

It cuts to the core of what kind of society we should want to live in. It cuts to the core of what we would want ourselves if falsely accused. It is a long term issue dealing with human rights in a collective society, not one case or one person.

 

 

 

 

 

I disagree, personally I think if he had been caught on video molesting the kid he should have been made into stew meat while he was still breathing - "human rights" in the legal sense are overrated, especially when they defend the worst criminals out there - personally I would be totally in favor of anyone who kills someone caught on camera raping a kid to be instantly pardoned - that's the thing, many of the responses here might be "right" in theory, but I don't think any of you have been in her shoes, and if you were in her shoes, and decided to do things the "legal and ethical" way at the expense of your kid being raped, then that would make you almost as bad as him.

If he had been caught on tape and the tape there was no one to view it at the time of the crime live, again, you hand the tape over to the police and let them take care of it.

Now, lets not mince issues here. IF he had been fucking her right in front of her then I'd say stab the son of a bitch to get him off of her. But that is not what happened in this story.

And even outside this story on the issue of this, how many times have you said something that in reality you know you really wouldn't do?

How many people have you heard say "I'd love to rob a bank"

Or "I'll kill em"

Knowing damned well it is highly likely they are just words most of the time.

You don't even know if this woman was mentally sane. What if she accused him of this simply to get rid of him? Or what if she misunderstood what he said?  Outside this case even here in the states parents in custody disputes can and do often lie about the others actions to gain custody of a kid.

Again, you are allowing the nature of the charge over ride the rational side of your brain that says EVIDENCE and rule of law are better than mob rule.

You are taking the story on face value. What if she lied because she was mentally ill, or lied because of something he did merely because she didn't like what he did? What if she got the child to lie?

I have sat in traffic court and watched plenty of people lie to the judge and the court. I have seen an entire family lie to a judge to keep their son out of jail.

Dont assume she was right. Because if she merely murdered him and made up that lie to murder him, you are excusing the actions of a murder.

In this case we have no way of really knowing because he was killed. So without him all you have is her word. Not very good as evidence if you ask me.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


RecoveringFund (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Recovering

Brian37 wrote:

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

It has been always part of our species evolution to protect our own young(not the young of others but within our own family or tribe)

As vile the prospect of what she accused him of was, I feel lucky to live in a country where AT LEAST you cannot be executed by proxy of mere accusation.

Having empathy for a victim should never in a civil society create a vigilante society. It is understandable that a parent would want to protect their child, but this was not the way to handle it. This is mere revenge, not containment.

Cases like this can lack physical evidence and teach kids to make false claims merely because they may not like an adult.

Nature of an accusation should never over ride our human ability to stick to facts to maximize the insurance to the society that someone does not get falsely harmed or jailed.

Revenge is not justice, it is merely an emotional reaction. In reality revenge does no good other than to satisfy the emotions of the one doing it. The best society can do in reality is to contain a criminal so that they cannot harm others.

This is what the west has gotten away from and when you look at the nations without this "revenge" mentality and no death penalty, they are more educated and less violent.

Since he was murdered we have no way to know what really happened and he had no way to counter any claim made because there was no court to defend him, no matter how understandable her reaction to protecting her kid was.

 

Well in this case I disagree - sure if he 'was' innocent then you'd be correct, but this is Pakistan, not the US, as in a country where a woman could likely be stoned to death for coming out against her molester.

It wouldn't matter to me if the guy was caught on video molesting his kid. Trials and courts and a right to a defense is how civil society deals with crime. Pakistan has yet to fully catch up with rational thinking. The emotions of the mother while understandable does not justify her reaction. ESPECIALLY when he was not in the middle of the action at the time. During the fact is one thing, before the fact and after the fact is another.

Otherwise if you simply want to say "good for her", lets just scrap our western society of courts and kill people in public just because we don't like what they are accused of.

There was a video back in the 90s that floated around news tv stations after the story aired. While being an intern I got to see the unedited tape the networks sent to local stations.

In the video you see two investigators escorting an accused child molester through an airport, he was in handcuffs of course. Behind him in the background you saw a wall of pay phones in which you see a man hang up the phone. The man walks behind the three, puts a gun to the prisoner's head and blows his brains out. It turns out the accused had allegedly molested his boy(that of the shooter).

NOW again, while understandable, we can not live in a society that reacts like that. The accused had not been convicted. If we take that mentality eventually someone who really is innocent could get their head blown off for no reason. What can you say at that point "ooops"?

THAT is why we have courts and not public executions sole based on the nature of the charge. If you are going to even merely put someone in jail and take away their freedom, you damned will better take care to minimize bias and emotion. Otherwise all society becomes is a mob.

It cuts to the core of what kind of society we should want to live in. It cuts to the core of what we would want ourselves if falsely accused. It is a long term issue dealing with human rights in a collective society, not one case or one person.

 

 

 

 

 

I disagree, personally I think if he had been caught on video molesting the kid he should have been made into stew meat while he was still breathing - "human rights" in the legal sense are overrated, especially when they defend the worst criminals out there - personally I would be totally in favor of anyone who kills someone caught on camera raping a kid to be instantly pardoned - that's the thing, many of the responses here might be "right" in theory, but I don't think any of you have been in her shoes, and if you were in her shoes, and decided to do things the "legal and ethical" way at the expense of your kid being raped, then that would make you almost as bad as him.

If he had been caught on tape and the tape there was no one to view it at the time of the crime live, again, you hand the tape over to the police and let them take care of it.

Now, lets not mince issues here. IF he had been fucking her right in front of her then I'd say stab the son of a bitch to get him off of her. But that is not what happened in this story.

And even outside this story on the issue of this, how many times have you said something that in reality you know you really wouldn't do?

How many people have you heard say "I'd love to rob a bank"

Or "I'll kill em"

Knowing damned well it is highly likely they are just words most of the time.

You don't even know if this woman was mentally sane. What if she accused him of this simply to get rid of him? Or what if she misunderstood what he said?  Outside this case even here in the states parents in custody disputes can and do often lie about the others actions to gain custody of a kid.

Again, you are allowing the nature of the charge over ride the rational side of your brain that says EVIDENCE and rule of law are better than mob rule.

You are taking the story on face value. What if she lied because she was mentally ill, or lied because of something he did merely because she didn't like what he did? What if she got the child to lie?

I have sat in traffic court and watched plenty of people lie to the judge and the court. I have seen an entire family lie to a judge to keep their son out of jail.

Dont assume she was right. Because if she merely murdered him and made up that lie to murder him, you are excusing the actions of a murder.

In this case we have no way of really knowing because he was killed. So without him all you have is her word. Not very good as evidence if you ask me.

 

 

 

Well you do make some good points, but supposing it was true and in a nation like Pakistan which is highly oppressive to women, I don't see how going to the police would have been a good solution, so we can talk about how he deserves all the rights and due process that we have here, but in a country like that, it's not the same.


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2398
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
as a point of fact, Brian37

Brian37 wrote:

And like I said before. What if the guy didn't do it and it was merely the kid lying or someone getting the kid to lie to get even with the accused. You shoot him in that case and you have wrongful murdered someone who didn't do it.

There was a famous day care case in California where several adults were charged and falsely convicted on basis of a climate of fear created(most likely because of the famous cases like Adam Walsh, at the time) Because of the zealous society and bad police work, several of these people were jailed for almost two decades.

Now the other problem with that, is because of the bad police work, they did not filter out bias or allow the children to use their own words. The basically manipulated the kids with fear "You don't want the bad guy to get away, you do want to help us, you don't want to get in trouble for not telling us the truth(what we want to hear).

Now even if there were some lagit complaints the tainted evidence and bad tactics on the part of the police, if any one accusation may have been true, there would be no way to know it because of the horrible investigation. Whereas if the investigation had been done properly there would be no mistake and the guilty would stay in jail.

BUT the way the story actually played out none of the charges turned out to be true and all the kids when they grew up recanted. A climate of fear and mob rule caused that.

So my default position will always be to default to presumption of innocence and default to letting the guilty go free rather than risk one innocent person be harmed. It is an an attitude that keeps mob rule and government abuse at bey.

Until you are falsely accused of something it is hard for most to understand. I've told this story before nothing criminal. But still scary because I felt all alone surrounded by people who wanted to get even with me for simply being in the wrong spot at the wrong time and the stupidity of telling the truth.

I was at a private school. We were having a field day. The playground sat at the top of a hill with a sheer drop over looking the main road protected by a concrete wall with rails to prevent you from falling off the playground. A car went by and I saw the right front passenger tire kick up a rock in the road and ding the door. It was so loud and the guy must have seen the kids on the hill when he was passing, he assumed someone had thrown the rock.

He came into the parking lot, found our principle and made the accusation. Like a dumb ass I stepped in and told the principle what had actually happened. Neither believed me. As a result he pulled all the kids back to the cafeteria and wouldn't let us go back outside until I confessed to throwing a rock I did not throw.

Everyone in that school hated me from then on. I had no lawyer, no witnesses and no video and no one to believe me. Now, take that non criminal event and imagine what it would be like if you were falsely accused of a serious violent crime. That was just school.

So that is why I say it is not a good idea to react to the nature of a charge in that manor even if the reaction is understandable.

 

 

 

 

                    The man who shot his son's kiddnapper/molester was charged with 1st degree murder,  and later acquited. The McMartin daycare case took 6 years to bring to trial, [do to lack of real evidence no doubt] the oldest son spent at least 5 years in pre-trial custody. All were acquited, the oldest son was retried; again acquited. It seems he was an board a ship in the US Navy when most of the "molesting" took place.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?