Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
I sent this to the List 5 days ago and it just got back to my mailbox. (I wonder whence it wandered). P. J. Alling wrote: She was a New York Family Court Judge. She probably had to tone it down for television. E.R.N. Reed wrote: John Forbes wrote: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in the world. Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) Rob Studdert Judge Judy is a member of the entertainment industry these days. It's just *possible* that she didn't behave quite as outrageously when she was actually on the Bench. -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
government may represent the people, however, it's (at least here in us) a quite separate, effectively, incorporated entity, that can make money, sue, be sued... i cannot sue the people of connecticut, but i definitely can do that to the state of connecticut. e.g, when i am a victim, and the state fails to protect me, the state can lose quite a bit of $$$. there's plenty of conflict of interests, since the police, prosecutors and judges are all state employees. i wonder how would anyone feel if cases "Microsoft vs. X" were handled entirely my Microsoft legal depertment? it is *somewhat* balanced by the presence of jury in criminal courts, but civil ones are far from being impartial. and as far as election goes... guess what: those who are really affected by the system (convicts) cannot vote. and those who can, couldn't care less, since it doesn't touch them directly (we all want to be *tough* on crime, don't we? that is, as long as we are on this side of the bars). best, mishka On 1/12/06, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The justice system and the penal system are set up and run by the > government, which represents The People, and which is elected by The > People. In the US, criminal prosecutions are in the style of cause > "The State vs. John Doe" or even (in some states) "The People vs. John > Doe". The prosecutor represents society at large. Jury trials are > before a "jury of peers", who represent society at large. > > Further, if the police, prosecutors and court system are incompetent, > over-aggressive, or corrupt, the ultimate solution rests with the > electors to bring in a government which will reform the system, and > sweep out such evils. > > Keith, I know that saying that we're all complicit and responsible for > wrongful convictions is a bit remote, but I guess that I was kind of > throwing a bit of political theory into the discussion . > > cheers, > frank > > > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > >
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
She was a New York Family Court Judge. She probably had to tone it down for television. E.R.N. Reed wrote: John Forbes wrote: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in the world. Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) Rob Studdert Judge Judy is a member of the entertainment industry these days. It's just *possible* that she didn't behave quite as outrageously when she was actually on the Bench. -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Ah, 'cause maybe it's a shitty place to be, especially if you don't want to be someone's girlfriend? Norm John Forbes wrote: Ever wondered why there are so many suicides in jail?
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
This man was not convicted, but cautioned for accessing some child porn images on the web. He may have done it in error -- who knows. Now see the result of the growing 'mob' hysteria. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/13/nkelly213.xml&DCMP=EMC-new_13012006 Don Bob W wrote: ~Not~ that I want to get into things religious, but... Is this from the same God that destroyed the entire world by flood, except one family and his pets in a big boat? Could it be that every single person in the world was guilty except Noah and his clan? Hm... Yup. That's the one. Guilty as charged Now, all of that being said, I know, Bob W, that you were simply presenting a much earlier version of the Blackstone/Jefferson sentiment, and not holding out the Bible as a model of consistency. I just couldn't resist. I guess (playing Devil's advocate for a moment) that the answer would be that Abraham was telling us what we humans should do. "Do as I say, not as I do," I suppose. Well, I reckon Abraham had a much better sense of justice than God had, and was telling God what he/she/it/they should do. Except, of course, that We Are All Guilty, thanks to the glorious concept of original sin. Cheers, Bobraham -- Dr E D F Williams ___ http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams See feature: The Cement Company from Hell Updated: Print Gallery-- 16 11 2005
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
John Forbes wrote: Frank's right. When a deranged individual does harm to somebody, there may be some excuse or explanation. When the state does harm, through incompetence or malice, there's no excuse. The damage done by a wrongful conviction is enormous, and the damage is done to the victim's family and friends as well as the victim himself. The damage is significant even if the wrongly accused is found innocent. It's months, a year, whatever of living hell, not to mention the post traumatic stress that follows. We tend to like to refer to the "State" as a faceless entity. It is of course real people doing real damage through malice and/or incompetence. Unfortunately, and understandably, when "justice" is eventually done, the last thing the victim wants to do is spend another year or more in court suing the system. They just want to get on with their lives. Tom C.
RE: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
> > ~Not~ that I want to get into things religious, but... > > Is this from the same God that destroyed the entire world by > flood, except one family and his pets in a big boat? Could > it be that every single person in the world was guilty except > Noah and his clan? > > Hm... Yup. That's the one. Guilty as charged > > Now, all of that being said, I know, Bob W, that you were > simply presenting a much earlier version of the > Blackstone/Jefferson sentiment, and not holding out the Bible > as a model of consistency. I just couldn't resist. > > I guess (playing Devil's advocate for a moment) that the > answer would be that Abraham was telling us what we humans > should do. "Do as I say, not as I do," I suppose. > Well, I reckon Abraham had a much better sense of justice than God had, and was telling God what he/she/it/they should do. Except, of course, that We Are All Guilty, thanks to the glorious concept of original sin. Cheers, Bobraham
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/12/06, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Blackstone and Jefferson weren't the first to express the same sentiment: > > Abraham came forward and said, "Will You sweep away the innocent along with > the guilty? > 24 What if there should be fifty innocent within the city; will You then > wipe out the place and not forgive it for the sake of the innocent fifty who > are in it? > 25 Far be it from You to do such a thing, to bring death upon the innocent > as well as the guilty, so that innocent and guilty fare alike. Far be it > from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?" > 32 And he said, "Let not my Lord be angry if I speak but this last time: > What if ten should be found there?" And He answered, "I will not destroy, > for the sake of the ten." > ~Not~ that I want to get into things religious, but... Is this from the same God that destroyed the entire world by flood, except one family and his pets in a big boat? Could it be that every single person in the world was guilty except Noah and his clan? Hm... Now, all of that being said, I know, Bob W, that you were simply presenting a much earlier version of the Blackstone/Jefferson sentiment, and not holding out the Bible as a model of consistency. I just couldn't resist. I guess (playing Devil's advocate for a moment) that the answer would be that Abraham was telling us what we humans should do. "Do as I say, not as I do," I suppose. cheers, frank, who's really not trying to be blasphemous, but trying to make sense of ancient sacred texts. -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
> >> Thomas Jefferson said that it was better for 100 guilty men to go > >> free than for one innocent man to be imprisoned. We've > lost sight of > >> that these days. > >> > >> Bob > > > > Sir William Blackstone, an approximate contemporary of > Jefferson, is > > to have said: > > > > "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one > innocent suffer." > > > > Same sentiment. No matter who may have said it first, I'm > with you, > > Bob. > > > > > I got the quote from my niece, a curator at Monticello, Jefferson's > Virginia home. > > Bob Blackstone and Jefferson weren't the first to express the same sentiment: Abraham came forward and said, "Will You sweep away the innocent along with the guilty? 24 What if there should be fifty innocent within the city; will You then wipe out the place and not forgive it for the sake of the innocent fifty who are in it? 25 Far be it from You to do such a thing, to bring death upon the innocent as well as the guilty, so that innocent and guilty fare alike. Far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?" 26 And the Lord answered, "If I find within the city of Sodom fifty innocent ones, I will forgive the whole place for their sake." 27 Abraham spoke up, saying, "Here I venture to speak to my Lord, I who am but dust and ashes: 28 What if the fifty innocent should lack five? Will You destroy the whole city for want of the five?" And He answered, "I will not destroy if I find forty-five there." 29 But he spoke to Him again, and said, "What if forty should be found there?" And He answered, "I will not do it, for the sake of the forty." 30 And he said, "Let not my Lord be angry if I go on: What if thirty should be found there?" And He answered, "I will not do it if I find thirty there." 31 And he said, "I venture again to speak to my Lord: What if twenty should be found there?" And He answered, "I will not destroy, for the sake of the twenty." 32 And he said, "Let not my Lord be angry if I speak but this last time: What if ten should be found there?" And He answered, "I will not destroy, for the sake of the ten."
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On Jan 11, 2006, at 9:25 AM, frank theriault wrote: Thomas Jefferson said that it was better for 100 guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be imprisoned. We've lost sight of that these days. Bob Sir William Blackstone, an approximate contemporary of Jefferson, is to have said: "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." Same sentiment. No matter who may have said it first, I'm with you, Bob. I got the quote from my niece, a curator at Monticello, Jefferson's Virginia home. Bob
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Referring to the innocent being wrongfully convicted and jailed, I said: > > It's a crime in > > which we are all complicit, and for which we all bear some > > responsibility. And, upon reflection, Keith succinctly asked: > From where does *that* conclusion derive? >From democracy. You know, government "of the people, for the people", all that stuff? The justice system and the penal system are set up and run by the government, which represents The People, and which is elected by The People. In the US, criminal prosecutions are in the style of cause "The State vs. John Doe" or even (in some states) "The People vs. John Doe". The prosecutor represents society at large. Jury trials are before a "jury of peers", who represent society at large. Further, if the police, prosecutors and court system are incompetent, over-aggressive, or corrupt, the ultimate solution rests with the electors to bring in a government which will reform the system, and sweep out such evils. Keith, I know that saying that we're all complicit and responsible for wrongful convictions is a bit remote, but I guess that I was kind of throwing a bit of political theory into the discussion . cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Frank's right. When a deranged individual does harm to somebody, there may be some excuse or explanation. When the state does harm, through incompetence or malice, there's no excuse. The damage done by a wrongful conviction is enormous, and the damage is done to the victim's family and friends as well as the victim himself. Ever wondered why there are so many suicides in jail? I imagine a significant proportion are by people who shouldn't be there in the first place. And we're all responsible, because we don't do enough to complain about state malpractice and incompetence. John On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:10:18 -, keith_w <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: frank theriault wrote: On 1/11/06, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: unfortunately, taking people's time away from them is also permanent, but as you say, it's not a perfect system and we have to choose the least of many evils. I agree. Not that I want to fan the flames any further, but to me, an innocent person sitting in jail for ~any~ length of time is as serious a crime as any crime perpetrated by an individual. Up to here you were doing well... It's a crime in which we are all complicit, and for which we all bear some responsibility. From where does *that* conclusion derive? To expand on a point that I made in an earlier post, while any portion stolen from an individual's life can't be fully repaid, at least some efforts can be made at restitution or compensation they won't replace that lost time, but, as you said, perhaps it's the least of many possible evils... cheers, frank keith -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
frank theriault wrote: On 1/11/06, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: unfortunately, taking people's time away from them is also permanent, but as you say, it's not a perfect system and we have to choose the least of many evils. I agree. Not that I want to fan the flames any further, but to me, an innocent person sitting in jail for ~any~ length of time is as serious a crime as any crime perpetrated by an individual. Up to here you were doing well... It's a crime in which we are all complicit, and for which we all bear some responsibility. From where does *that* conclusion derive? To expand on a point that I made in an earlier post, while any portion stolen from an individual's life can't be fully repaid, at least some efforts can be made at restitution or compensation they won't replace that lost time, but, as you said, perhaps it's the least of many possible evils... cheers, frank keith
RE: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
> -Original Message- > From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12 January 2006 00:15 > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:59:38 -, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I don't know about you, but I'm getting worried about being > turned in > > for dead horse abuse. :-) > > > > Tom C. > > Necrofillyphilia is the legal term. > > John Very good - made me neigh out loud! Shergar
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
I donno, he has no children... (Yes I know I'm baaad). Tom C wrote: Wiiliam Robb wrote: Some 50 or so years ago, Saskatchewan used to routinely sterilize mental deficients. I take it you just squeaked by then... could not resist... wide open... wide wide wide open. :-) Tom C. -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Why the personal tone? Jack --- William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Jack Davis" > Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded > > > > You still feel frustrated by your insecurity? > > Don't do it again and you may just get away with it..whatever "it" > is. > > Jack, I feel frustrated by your stupidity sometimes. > Other than that, I'm pretty stable. > > William Robb > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "Tom C" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded I take it you just squeaked by then... could not resist... wide open... wide wide wide open. :-) I volunteered when I got married, on the theory it's better to do the right thing yourself if those in charge don't. OTOH, I did manage to avoid the whole thalidomide thing by having smart parents. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Wiiliam Robb wrote: Some 50 or so years ago, Saskatchewan used to routinely sterilize mental deficients. I take it you just squeaked by then... could not resist... wide open... wide wide wide open. :-) Tom C.
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "Tom C" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded What's the point? The fact that crimes are comitted does not justify comitting other "crimes" to catch the criminal. And if it's not the criminal who's caught, but an innocent person, what was accomplished? I think the euphemism is "collateral damage" William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
In theory. Tom C. From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:33:26 -0600 - Original Message - From: "P. J. Alling" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Legally if you are charged and found guilty, you are guilty. That's a tautology. Whether you've committed the crime that you're guilty of is beside the point. In most of the English speaking world, you're not guilty until after the trial, and until the finder of fact makes it's declaration, your guilt is in doubt. At least that's how it's supposed to work in theory. In theory, police and prosecuters are also honestly looking for the guilty person, and not just someone to pin it on. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "Jack Davis" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded You still feel frustrated by your insecurity? Don't do it again and you may just get away with it..whatever "it" is. Jack, I feel frustrated by your stupidity sometimes. Other than that, I'm pretty stable. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "P. J. Alling" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded I guess that's better then... Okay, not idiots (because generally, we're pretty docile). Lobotomize schizophrenics. That better? Some 50 or so years ago, Saskatchewan used to routinely sterilize mental deficients. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "frank theriault" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded It even happens in sleepy small town Saskatchewan, Canada (I'm sure Wheatfield is familiar with this one): http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/martin/ All it takes is an enthusiastic social worker, a police force afraid to be seen as "ignoring" so-called signs of sex abuse, an overzealous prosecutor, and lives are ruined... We are now seeing the long term results of this. The children who were victimized by the police and social workers (basically, they were brainwashed into telling their stories about what was happenning in the Sterling household) are really screwed up. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded http://www.rainn.org/statistics/index.html I've always been amused by the "we don't know anything so we'll make it up" method of deriving statistics. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "P. J. Alling" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Legally if you are charged and found guilty, you are guilty. That's a tautology. Whether you've committed the crime that you're guilty of is beside the point. In most of the English speaking world, you're not guilty until after the trial, and until the finder of fact makes it's declaration, your guilt is in doubt. At least that's how it's supposed to work in theory. In theory, police and prosecuters are also honestly looking for the guilty person, and not just someone to pin it on. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "P. J. Alling" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Foreign policy is that way in every country. Just some are more straight forward than others. Well, not really, but you aren't in a position to discuss this one, and it is so far off topic that it should be dropped.
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
That last message may be exactly that for this thread. It was to satisfy my need for "closure". Lets see, where did I put that camera. Jack --- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jack Davis wote (with my replies interspersed): > > >Injustice through ignorance is a reality. > > I agree. > > >Realizing that's the case, it's easy to say to yourself; "I can't be > > >responsible for the > >unthinking damage they are going to cause to all those connected". > > I think the difference is I say to myself, "I won't be responsible". > I have > a young teenage son. If he was ever the victim of abuse, I'd likely > want to > handle the castration phase of the punishment myself! On the other > hand I'd > realize going around harming others in the attempt to find the right > person > to castrate, is not right either. > > >People are selfish and indiscriminate in their conclusion jumping, > ego > >driven, opinion spewing. > >I'm NOT referring to anyone on this list, only to some of those > written > >about. > > Which is what my conscience and course of action/non-action would > hopefully > help me and others avoid. > > I don't advocate "erring on the side of (fill in the blank)" just > because a > child is involved. Taking the proper course of action, because I am > well > informed, would be my approach. > > I don't know about you, but I'm getting worried about being turned in > for > dead horse abuse. :-) > > Tom C. > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Very funny! Tom C. I don't know about you, but I'm getting worried about being turned in for dead horse abuse. :-) Tom C. Necrofillyphilia is the legal term. John
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:59:38 -, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't know about you, but I'm getting worried about being turned in for dead horse abuse. :-) Tom C. Necrofillyphilia is the legal term. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Jack Davis wote (with my replies interspersed): Injustice through ignorance is a reality. I agree. Realizing that's the case, it's easy to say to yourself; "I can't be responsible for the unthinking damage they are going to cause to all those connected". I think the difference is I say to myself, "I won't be responsible". I have a young teenage son. If he was ever the victim of abuse, I'd likely want to handle the castration phase of the punishment myself! On the other hand I'd realize going around harming others in the attempt to find the right person to castrate, is not right either. People are selfish and indiscriminate in their conclusion jumping, ego driven, opinion spewing. I'm NOT referring to anyone on this list, only to some of those written about. Which is what my conscience and course of action/non-action would hopefully help me and others avoid. I don't advocate "erring on the side of (fill in the blank)" just because a child is involved. Taking the proper course of action, because I am well informed, would be my approach. I don't know about you, but I'm getting worried about being turned in for dead horse abuse. :-) Tom C.
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Injustice through ignorance is a reality. Realizing that's the case, it's easy to say to yourself; "I can't be responsible for the unthinking damage they are going to cause to all those connected". People are selfish and indiscriminate in their conclusion jumping, ego driven, opinion spewing. I'm NOT referring to anyone on this list, only to some of those written about. Jack --- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > People just need to put themselves in others shoes for a few moments. > > Any crime/alledged crime regardess of how despicable, should not be > justification for further injustice being done. That injustice can > be done, > as stated earlier, by raising unjustified suspicion, or interfering > in > others lives without sufficent information. > > In the US it appears that unborn children have no rights and can be > treated > as non-entities and disposed of. Born children do have rights, and > you > better not mess up or do anything someone else feels is abusive, or > you risk > being turned into the authorities. And apparently rights of children > trump > the rights of anyone 18 or older. > > All that's needed is a sense of all around fairness and recognition > that any > number of wrongs do not make a right. > > Tom C. > > > > > >From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > >To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > >Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded > >Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:57:15 -0500 > > > >On 1/11/06, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > unfortunately, taking people's time away from them is also > permanent, > >but as > > > you say, it's not a perfect system and we have to choose the > least of > >many > > > evils. > > > > > > >I agree. Not that I want to fan the flames any further, but to me, > an > >innocent person sitting in jail for ~any~ length of time is as > serious > >a crime as any crime perpetrated by an individual. It's a crime in > >which we are all complicit, and for which we all bear some > >responsibility. > > > >To expand on a point that I made in an earlier post, while any > portion > >stolen from an individual's life can't be fully repaid, at least > some > >efforts can be made at restitution or compensation they won't > replace > >that lost time, but, as you said, perhaps it's the least of many > >possible evils... > > > >cheers, > >frank > > > > > >-- > >"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
People just need to put themselves in others shoes for a few moments. Any crime/alledged crime regardess of how despicable, should not be justification for further injustice being done. That injustice can be done, as stated earlier, by raising unjustified suspicion, or interfering in others lives without sufficent information. In the US it appears that unborn children have no rights and can be treated as non-entities and disposed of. Born children do have rights, and you better not mess up or do anything someone else feels is abusive, or you risk being turned into the authorities. And apparently rights of children trump the rights of anyone 18 or older. All that's needed is a sense of all around fairness and recognition that any number of wrongs do not make a right. Tom C. From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:57:15 -0500 On 1/11/06, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > unfortunately, taking people's time away from them is also permanent, but as > you say, it's not a perfect system and we have to choose the least of many > evils. > I agree. Not that I want to fan the flames any further, but to me, an innocent person sitting in jail for ~any~ length of time is as serious a crime as any crime perpetrated by an individual. It's a crime in which we are all complicit, and for which we all bear some responsibility. To expand on a point that I made in an earlier post, while any portion stolen from an individual's life can't be fully repaid, at least some efforts can be made at restitution or compensation they won't replace that lost time, but, as you said, perhaps it's the least of many possible evils... cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
UTTERLY! Jack --- Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I feel the same way. Did you hear about the case in Vermont where > the > judge gave an offender who had been raping a 6 year old girl for 4 > years > only 60 days in jail? The judge said that because vermont did not > have > a way of rehabilitating the offender, that it was not worth keeping > him > in jail. Ridiculous. Where is the justice for that little girl? > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 1/10/2006 2:12:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > but we're talking here about innocent people. People wrongly > convicted whose > > balls you've already cut off when you find out they're innocent. > What about > > these women here: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3306049.stm. > > Which parts of their bodies would you cut off? > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Bob > > > > How come you guys keep identifying with the innocent, instead of > with the > > literally tons of non-innocent? > > > > More people are convicted who are guilty than innocent (of the > crime charged). > > > > Personally, I have zero tolerance for pedophilia. And I am not > talking about > > someone just photographing kids. Or someone being mistaken for a > pedophile who > > photographs kids. Someone who actually commits physical acts. > Proven. It does > > happen. And it happens a lot. Maybe a lot more than people want to > admit. > > > > Maybe this is a male/female thing or a parent/non-parent thing. > Although not > > a parent, personally, I identify with parents. And I know there > really are > > evil people in the world (well, seriously sick, but it amounts to > the same > > thing). > > > > Oh, well, tired of this discussion. Someone can argue with me, but > I am out > > of it now. > > > > Just puzzling to me that people keep identifying with the innocent. > I think > > DNA is great and I am glad it is being used now to free truly > innocents from > > old cases. Not being done fast enough and wide enough, but it is > happening. > > > > But the US criminal justice system (except for people in jail for > drugs which > > I think should not be a crime) is not 100% wrong all the time. I > suspect it's > > more in the range of 10-20% wrong. Hard to know, really. But that > leaves > > 80-90% right. Probably even higher than that. > > > > We have too many people in jail, yes, but that is mainly drug > related. > > > > Marnie aka Doe > > > > -- > Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I > > was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. > "...Here's > a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? > - Mitch Hedberg > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > unfortunately, taking people's time away from them is also permanent, but as > you say, it's not a perfect system and we have to choose the least of many > evils. > I agree. Not that I want to fan the flames any further, but to me, an innocent person sitting in jail for ~any~ length of time is as serious a crime as any crime perpetrated by an individual. It's a crime in which we are all complicit, and for which we all bear some responsibility. To expand on a point that I made in an earlier post, while any portion stolen from an individual's life can't be fully repaid, at least some efforts can be made at restitution or compensation they won't replace that lost time, but, as you said, perhaps it's the least of many possible evils... cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Nagging wife can be just as effective. Jack --- Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Castration, chemical or otherwise, does not guarantee any type of > prevention. But the tremendous reduction in testosterone is believed > to > help the offender control the impulses greatly. > > > Tom C wrote: > > When you get right down to it... does any kind of castration > guarantee > > that the offender won't re-offend? I didn't think it was the parts > > > removed during castration that was necessarially the offending > organ... > > or is there something basic in this regard that I have yet to > learn? > > > > Tom C. > > > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >> Well, there is chemical castration. Which I guess works to some > degree. > >> > >> Marnie aka Doe > >> > > > > > > -- > Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I > > was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. > "...Here's > a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? > - Mitch Hedberg > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Maybe you should do what I have managed to do, until now: ignore it. But my feelings about this is that the effects of false accusations are underestimated. They can really ruin someone's life. First, I think of the fact that I lived next to Oppenheimer´s widow in 1968, and think of what harm was done with all the false accusations regarding communists and traitors in the McCarthy periode. It really ruined a lot of people, even if they were proven innocent. Second, I think about once when I was about 20. Some idiot in the boy scouts where I was a leader had some odd ideas resulting in the accusation that ALL of us were nazis. Of course I survived, but it made me think. Third, only because it was the most recent, was three years ago when a mad neighbor accused my wife for child abuse and claimed that she had reported it. Yes, we believe she spread some rumors, some neighbors stopped greeting us for a while, but it is back to normal again now. So, the question is: How many innocent do we want to sacrifice to get the bad guys? The innocents have children too, and they get hurt too. Now I´ll keep trying to ignore this thread. DagT Den 11. jan. 2006 kl. 22.01 skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This thread is making me incredibly angry. As a feminist is hard to resist ranting about people having their heads in the sand. Or make some comments about mcps. Or something similar. Again, people seem to want to identify with the wrongly accused instead of with the thousands and thousands of actual victims. People seem to want to dig out the few times sometimes is accused wrongly, instead of digging out stories of actual victims. I find this thread turned on its head and wonder why. I have zero tolerance for pediophilia and zero tolerance for any kind of sexual abuse. It happens, it's real. It's not all innocent people wrongly accused. And most of it is perpetrated by people the attacked child/adult knows. Read the statistics in the url I posted. My former best friend (of 14 years) was an incest survivor that had been abused by her father since the age of five. My mother's former hair dresser daughter disappeared. A stranger abduction, raped and murdered. I am so flipping angry I am now immediately unsubscribing for a while. To avoid ranting, because I am here for photography and I don't need the grieve of ranting and arguing. Heads in the sand. All I can figure. Later, Marnie
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Certainly I do. It's a travesty. Tom C. From: Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Clarification: I feel the same way about the heinousness of the crime. Thats what I meant by I feel the same way. I'm not advocating convicting innocent people, nor throwing a net out that would result in the same, even if the crime is pretty bad. This case in Vermont, USA, tho, is pretty ridiculous, dont you think? The guy was guilty by his own confession. Tom C wrote: That's ridiculous but how would it justify accusing, trying, convicting and innocent person? Tom C. From: Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:18:27 -0600 I feel the same way. Did you hear about the case in Vermont where the judge gave an offender who had been raping a 6 year old girl for 4 years only 60 days in jail? The judge said that because vermont did not have a way of rehabilitating the offender, that it was not worth keeping him in jail. Ridiculous. Where is the justice for that little girl? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 1/10/2006 2:12:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: but we're talking here about innocent people. People wrongly convicted whose balls you've already cut off when you find out they're innocent. What about these women here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3306049.stm. Which parts of their bodies would you cut off? -- Cheers, Bob How come you guys keep identifying with the innocent, instead of with the literally tons of non-innocent? More people are convicted who are guilty than innocent (of the crime charged). Personally, I have zero tolerance for pedophilia. And I am not talking about someone just photographing kids. Or someone being mistaken for a pedophile who photographs kids. Someone who actually commits physical acts. Proven. It does happen. And it happens a lot. Maybe a lot more than people want to admit. Maybe this is a male/female thing or a parent/non-parent thing. Although not a parent, personally, I identify with parents. And I know there really are evil people in the world (well, seriously sick, but it amounts to the same thing). Oh, well, tired of this discussion. Someone can argue with me, but I am out of it now. Just puzzling to me that people keep identifying with the innocent. I think DNA is great and I am glad it is being used now to free truly innocents from old cases. Not being done fast enough and wide enough, but it is happening. But the US criminal justice system (except for people in jail for drugs which I think should not be a crime) is not 100% wrong all the time. I suspect it's more in the range of 10-20% wrong. Hard to know, really. But that leaves 80-90% right. Probably even higher than that. We have too many people in jail, yes, but that is mainly drug related. Marnie aka Doe -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Clarification: I feel the same way about the heinousness of the crime. Thats what I meant by I feel the same way. I'm not advocating convicting innocent people, nor throwing a net out that would result in the same, even if the crime is pretty bad. This case in Vermont, USA, tho, is pretty ridiculous, dont you think? The guy was guilty by his own confession. Tom C wrote: That's ridiculous but how would it justify accusing, trying, convicting and innocent person? Tom C. From: Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:18:27 -0600 I feel the same way. Did you hear about the case in Vermont where the judge gave an offender who had been raping a 6 year old girl for 4 years only 60 days in jail? The judge said that because vermont did not have a way of rehabilitating the offender, that it was not worth keeping him in jail. Ridiculous. Where is the justice for that little girl? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 1/10/2006 2:12:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: but we're talking here about innocent people. People wrongly convicted whose balls you've already cut off when you find out they're innocent. What about these women here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3306049.stm. Which parts of their bodies would you cut off? -- Cheers, Bob How come you guys keep identifying with the innocent, instead of with the literally tons of non-innocent? More people are convicted who are guilty than innocent (of the crime charged). Personally, I have zero tolerance for pedophilia. And I am not talking about someone just photographing kids. Or someone being mistaken for a pedophile who photographs kids. Someone who actually commits physical acts. Proven. It does happen. And it happens a lot. Maybe a lot more than people want to admit. Maybe this is a male/female thing or a parent/non-parent thing. Although not a parent, personally, I identify with parents. And I know there really are evil people in the world (well, seriously sick, but it amounts to the same thing). Oh, well, tired of this discussion. Someone can argue with me, but I am out of it now. Just puzzling to me that people keep identifying with the innocent. I think DNA is great and I am glad it is being used now to free truly innocents from old cases. Not being done fast enough and wide enough, but it is happening. But the US criminal justice system (except for people in jail for drugs which I think should not be a crime) is not 100% wrong all the time. I suspect it's more in the range of 10-20% wrong. Hard to know, really. But that leaves 80-90% right. Probably even higher than that. We have too many people in jail, yes, but that is mainly drug related. Marnie aka Doe -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Well written Frank. Marnie for you to accuse me or othesr of having their heads in the sand, is just, well, plain insulting. Tom C. From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:03:01 -0500 On 1/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This thread is making me incredibly angry. > > As a feminist is hard to resist ranting about people having their heads in > the sand. > > Or make some comments about mcps. Or something similar. > > Again, people seem to want to identify with the wrongly accused instead of > with the thousands and thousands of actual victims. People seem to want to dig > out the few times sometimes is accused wrongly, instead of digging out stories > of actual victims. > > I find this thread turned on its head and wonder why. > > I have zero tolerance for pediophilia and zero tolerance for any kind of > sexual abuse. It happens, it's real. It's not all innocent people wrongly accused. > And most of it is perpetrated by people the attacked child/adult knows. Read > the statistics in the url I posted. > > My former best friend (of 14 years) was an incest survivor that had been > abused by her father since the age of five. My mother's former hair dresser > daughter disappeared. A stranger abduction, raped and murdered. > > I am so flipping angry I am now immediately unsubscribing for a while. To > avoid ranting, because I am here for photography and I don't need the grieve of > ranting and arguing. > > Heads in the sand. All I can figure. > Marnie, If I can offer some advice, please don't unsub (we like you, really - at least I do). If the thread upsets you, just don't read it. There's no doubt that one of the most heinous crimes imaginable is sexual child abuse. I think I can speak for everyone here in condemning it unconditionally. Those who are guilty of it should be dealt with most severely, and shown no lenience (although there are clearly differing opinions as to the appropriate limits of such punishment) The flip side of that, and a sad reality in this world is that allegations of child abuse are used as a weapon by sick and twisted individuals who want to tar and feather enemies. Given the extreme seriousness of those allegations, it's often the case that those wrongfully accused (I don't mean just those criminally accused by the police, but also those accused where the charges never make it to court) have their lives ruined by those spurious allegations. Innocent people lose jobs, innocent parents lose families and innocent children are pried from innocent parents. I'm not saying what percentage of accusations are groundless, and I'm not saying that the majority of accusations didn't actually happen. But, it does cut both ways, and it seems to me that those (like me) that are talking about the rights of the ~accused~ (not those who are found guilty, but those who have only had a finger pointed at them) are simply saying that a mere accusation ought not be enough to ruin a life. Don't think of it as the "rights of the accused", as much as the rights of every individual in society against wrongful prosecution and punishment. None of this minimizes my awareness of the horror that victims go through. None of this means that I don't want those vermin who violate our innocent children to pay for their crimes. I'm against the death penalty, as I am forced castration (either physical or pharmaceutical), but I'm not against sending them to jail and throwing away the key (ie: life with no parole); at least that way, if there is a mistaken conviction, a life can somehow be salvaged. Anyway, this thread has obviously frayed many nerves, including yours. Everyone has voiced their opinion, and I fear that no one will be "converted" to anothers' point of view. Perhaps it's time to put this thread to rest? Whatever happens with this very contentious thread, however, Marnie, I hope you reconsider leaving... cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This thread is making me incredibly angry. > > As a feminist is hard to resist ranting about people having their heads in > the sand. > > Or make some comments about mcps. Or something similar. > > Again, people seem to want to identify with the wrongly accused instead of > with the thousands and thousands of actual victims. People seem to want to dig > out the few times sometimes is accused wrongly, instead of digging out stories > of actual victims. > > I find this thread turned on its head and wonder why. > > I have zero tolerance for pediophilia and zero tolerance for any kind of > sexual abuse. It happens, it's real. It's not all innocent people wrongly > accused. > And most of it is perpetrated by people the attacked child/adult knows. Read > the statistics in the url I posted. > > My former best friend (of 14 years) was an incest survivor that had been > abused by her father since the age of five. My mother's former hair dresser > daughter disappeared. A stranger abduction, raped and murdered. > > I am so flipping angry I am now immediately unsubscribing for a while. To > avoid ranting, because I am here for photography and I don't need the grieve > of > ranting and arguing. > > Heads in the sand. All I can figure. > Marnie, If I can offer some advice, please don't unsub (we like you, really - at least I do). If the thread upsets you, just don't read it. There's no doubt that one of the most heinous crimes imaginable is sexual child abuse. I think I can speak for everyone here in condemning it unconditionally. Those who are guilty of it should be dealt with most severely, and shown no lenience (although there are clearly differing opinions as to the appropriate limits of such punishment) The flip side of that, and a sad reality in this world is that allegations of child abuse are used as a weapon by sick and twisted individuals who want to tar and feather enemies. Given the extreme seriousness of those allegations, it's often the case that those wrongfully accused (I don't mean just those criminally accused by the police, but also those accused where the charges never make it to court) have their lives ruined by those spurious allegations. Innocent people lose jobs, innocent parents lose families and innocent children are pried from innocent parents. I'm not saying what percentage of accusations are groundless, and I'm not saying that the majority of accusations didn't actually happen. But, it does cut both ways, and it seems to me that those (like me) that are talking about the rights of the ~accused~ (not those who are found guilty, but those who have only had a finger pointed at them) are simply saying that a mere accusation ought not be enough to ruin a life. Don't think of it as the "rights of the accused", as much as the rights of every individual in society against wrongful prosecution and punishment. None of this minimizes my awareness of the horror that victims go through. None of this means that I don't want those vermin who violate our innocent children to pay for their crimes. I'm against the death penalty, as I am forced castration (either physical or pharmaceutical), but I'm not against sending them to jail and throwing away the key (ie: life with no parole); at least that way, if there is a mistaken conviction, a life can somehow be salvaged. Anyway, this thread has obviously frayed many nerves, including yours. Everyone has voiced their opinion, and I fear that no one will be "converted" to anothers' point of view. Perhaps it's time to put this thread to rest? Whatever happens with this very contentious thread, however, Marnie, I hope you reconsider leaving... cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 11 Jan 2006 at 12:40, John Francis wrote: > The US Justice system isn't designed to provide justice. > A better name would be Punishment & Revenge system. I think the law system and personal justice are divergent entities in most modern societies. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Very similar to what I just posted... read your thoughts after the fact, and I agree 100% Tom C. From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: Subject: RE: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:23:45 - People who are wrongly accused of crimes are also victims. Having sympathy for them in no way lessens the sympathy we feel for the principal victims of the crime, or suggests in any way that we tolerate paedophilia or sexual abuse. We want the right people to be tried and convicted. When that happens the victims of the crime have at least a chance of achieving justice. If the wrong people are tried and convicted, nobody achieves justice and the person who really committed the crimes is free to commit more crimes. More paedophilia, more sexual abuse. I'm quite sure you don't want that. -- Cheers, Bob > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 11 January 2006 21:01 > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded > > This thread is making me incredibly angry. > > As a feminist is hard to resist ranting about people having > their heads in the sand. > > Or make some comments about mcps. Or something similar. > > Again, people seem to want to identify with the wrongly > accused instead of with the thousands and thousands of actual > victims. People seem to want to dig out the few times > sometimes is accused wrongly, instead of digging out stories > of actual victims. > > I find this thread turned on its head and wonder why. > > I have zero tolerance for pediophilia and zero tolerance for > any kind of sexual abuse. It happens, it's real. It's not all > innocent people wrongly accused. > And most of it is perpetrated by people the attacked > child/adult knows. Read the statistics in the url I posted. > > My former best friend (of 14 years) was an incest survivor > that had been abused by her father since the age of five. My > mother's former hair dresser daughter disappeared. A stranger > abduction, raped and murdered. > > I am so flipping angry I am now immediately unsubscribing for > a while. To avoid ranting, because I am here for photography > and I don't need the grieve of ranting and arguing. > > Heads in the sand. All I can figure. > > Later, Marnie > > > >
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
That's ridiculous but how would it justify accusing, trying, convicting and innocent person? Tom C. From: Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:18:27 -0600 I feel the same way. Did you hear about the case in Vermont where the judge gave an offender who had been raping a 6 year old girl for 4 years only 60 days in jail? The judge said that because vermont did not have a way of rehabilitating the offender, that it was not worth keeping him in jail. Ridiculous. Where is the justice for that little girl? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 1/10/2006 2:12:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: but we're talking here about innocent people. People wrongly convicted whose balls you've already cut off when you find out they're innocent. What about these women here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3306049.stm. Which parts of their bodies would you cut off? -- Cheers, Bob How come you guys keep identifying with the innocent, instead of with the literally tons of non-innocent? More people are convicted who are guilty than innocent (of the crime charged). Personally, I have zero tolerance for pedophilia. And I am not talking about someone just photographing kids. Or someone being mistaken for a pedophile who photographs kids. Someone who actually commits physical acts. Proven. It does happen. And it happens a lot. Maybe a lot more than people want to admit. Maybe this is a male/female thing or a parent/non-parent thing. Although not a parent, personally, I identify with parents. And I know there really are evil people in the world (well, seriously sick, but it amounts to the same thing). Oh, well, tired of this discussion. Someone can argue with me, but I am out of it now. Just puzzling to me that people keep identifying with the innocent. I think DNA is great and I am glad it is being used now to free truly innocents from old cases. Not being done fast enough and wide enough, but it is happening. But the US criminal justice system (except for people in jail for drugs which I think should not be a crime) is not 100% wrong all the time. I suspect it's more in the range of 10-20% wrong. Hard to know, really. But that leaves 80-90% right. Probably even higher than that. We have too many people in jail, yes, but that is mainly drug related. Marnie aka Doe -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Would you feel the same way if you were wrongly accused? Think about it. What if I started writing slanderous things about you and they got put in the PDML archives for the world to see and read? What if some whacko tracked you down and reported you to the authorities. What if an investigation was started? I think your even wrong in stating who I and others identify with. Fine, have a bleeding heart for those who are victims. Most of us do. They deserve sympathy. But don't go ignoring the fact that those who are falsely accused of 'said crimes' are just as much victims as anyone else. Tom C. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:01:03 EST This thread is making me incredibly angry. As a feminist is hard to resist ranting about people having their heads in the sand. Or make some comments about mcps. Or something similar. Again, people seem to want to identify with the wrongly accused instead of with the thousands and thousands of actual victims. People seem to want to dig out the few times sometimes is accused wrongly, instead of digging out stories of actual victims. I find this thread turned on its head and wonder why. I have zero tolerance for pediophilia and zero tolerance for any kind of sexual abuse. It happens, it's real. It's not all innocent people wrongly accused. And most of it is perpetrated by people the attacked child/adult knows. Read the statistics in the url I posted. My former best friend (of 14 years) was an incest survivor that had been abused by her father since the age of five. My mother's former hair dresser daughter disappeared. A stranger abduction, raped and murdered. I am so flipping angry I am now immediately unsubscribing for a while. To avoid ranting, because I am here for photography and I don't need the grieve of ranting and arguing. Heads in the sand. All I can figure. Later, Marnie
RE: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
> > Until the justice system is 100% effective (which it never > ever can be, due to human error) we must avoid permanent > punishments, such as execution, castration, lobotomy, etc. > It's only humane... > unfortunately, taking people's time away from them is also permanent, but as you say, it's not a perfect system and we have to choose the least of many evils. Bob
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
What's the point? The fact that crimes are comitted does not justify comitting other "crimes" to catch the criminal. And if it's not the criminal who's caught, but an innocent person, what was accomplished? Tom C. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:40:35 EST http://www.rainn.org/statistics/index.html Marnie aka Doe
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
LOL... seriously. Tom C. From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:09:04 -0500 I'd like to see some footnotes on their "facts". Don't think I'm insensitive, but how the hell do you even claim a hard percentage on an unreported crime. It's unreported! At best it's an educated guess, at worst it's a number someone pulled out of their a**. It's not surprising that a major joke is that 42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.rainn.org/statistics/index.html Marnie aka Doe -- When you're worried or in doubt,Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
I feel the same way. Did you hear about the case in Vermont where the judge gave an offender who had been raping a 6 year old girl for 4 years only 60 days in jail? The judge said that because vermont did not have a way of rehabilitating the offender, that it was not worth keeping him in jail. Ridiculous. Where is the justice for that little girl? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 1/10/2006 2:12:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: but we're talking here about innocent people. People wrongly convicted whose balls you've already cut off when you find out they're innocent. What about these women here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3306049.stm. Which parts of their bodies would you cut off? -- Cheers, Bob How come you guys keep identifying with the innocent, instead of with the literally tons of non-innocent? More people are convicted who are guilty than innocent (of the crime charged). Personally, I have zero tolerance for pedophilia. And I am not talking about someone just photographing kids. Or someone being mistaken for a pedophile who photographs kids. Someone who actually commits physical acts. Proven. It does happen. And it happens a lot. Maybe a lot more than people want to admit. Maybe this is a male/female thing or a parent/non-parent thing. Although not a parent, personally, I identify with parents. And I know there really are evil people in the world (well, seriously sick, but it amounts to the same thing). Oh, well, tired of this discussion. Someone can argue with me, but I am out of it now. Just puzzling to me that people keep identifying with the innocent. I think DNA is great and I am glad it is being used now to free truly innocents from old cases. Not being done fast enough and wide enough, but it is happening. But the US criminal justice system (except for people in jail for drugs which I think should not be a crime) is not 100% wrong all the time. I suspect it's more in the range of 10-20% wrong. Hard to know, really. But that leaves 80-90% right. Probably even higher than that. We have too many people in jail, yes, but that is mainly drug related. Marnie aka Doe -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Castration, chemical or otherwise, does not guarantee any type of prevention. But the tremendous reduction in testosterone is believed to help the offender control the impulses greatly. Tom C wrote: When you get right down to it... does any kind of castration guarantee that the offender won't re-offend? I didn't think it was the parts removed during castration that was necessarially the offending organ... or is there something basic in this regard that I have yet to learn? Tom C. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, there is chemical castration. Which I guess works to some degree. Marnie aka Doe -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg
RE: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
People who are wrongly accused of crimes are also victims. Having sympathy for them in no way lessens the sympathy we feel for the principal victims of the crime, or suggests in any way that we tolerate paedophilia or sexual abuse. We want the right people to be tried and convicted. When that happens the victims of the crime have at least a chance of achieving justice. If the wrong people are tried and convicted, nobody achieves justice and the person who really committed the crimes is free to commit more crimes. More paedophilia, more sexual abuse. I'm quite sure you don't want that. -- Cheers, Bob > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 11 January 2006 21:01 > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded > > This thread is making me incredibly angry. > > As a feminist is hard to resist ranting about people having > their heads in the sand. > > Or make some comments about mcps. Or something similar. > > Again, people seem to want to identify with the wrongly > accused instead of with the thousands and thousands of actual > victims. People seem to want to dig out the few times > sometimes is accused wrongly, instead of digging out stories > of actual victims. > > I find this thread turned on its head and wonder why. > > I have zero tolerance for pediophilia and zero tolerance for > any kind of sexual abuse. It happens, it's real. It's not all > innocent people wrongly accused. > And most of it is perpetrated by people the attacked > child/adult knows. Read the statistics in the url I posted. > > My former best friend (of 14 years) was an incest survivor > that had been abused by her father since the age of five. My > mother's former hair dresser daughter disappeared. A stranger > abduction, raped and murdered. > > I am so flipping angry I am now immediately unsubscribing for > a while. To avoid ranting, because I am here for photography > and I don't need the grieve of ranting and arguing. > > Heads in the sand. All I can figure. > > Later, Marnie > > > >
RE: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Of course not. Otherwise it would be spelt huperbole. -- Cheers, Bob > -Original Message- > From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 11 January 2006 19:11 > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded > > On 1/11/06, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > What would be the point in that? > > Okay, not idiots (because generally, we're pretty docile). > Lobotomize schizophrenics. That better? > > cheers, > frank, who was just using hyperbole to make a point... > > ps: hyperbole does not rhyme with Superbowl. > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > > > >
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
This thread is making me incredibly angry. As a feminist is hard to resist ranting about people having their heads in the sand. Or make some comments about mcps. Or something similar. Again, people seem to want to identify with the wrongly accused instead of with the thousands and thousands of actual victims. People seem to want to dig out the few times sometimes is accused wrongly, instead of digging out stories of actual victims. I find this thread turned on its head and wonder why. I have zero tolerance for pediophilia and zero tolerance for any kind of sexual abuse. It happens, it's real. It's not all innocent people wrongly accused. And most of it is perpetrated by people the attacked child/adult knows. Read the statistics in the url I posted. My former best friend (of 14 years) was an incest survivor that had been abused by her father since the age of five. My mother's former hair dresser daughter disappeared. A stranger abduction, raped and murdered. I am so flipping angry I am now immediately unsubscribing for a while. To avoid ranting, because I am here for photography and I don't need the grieve of ranting and arguing. Heads in the sand. All I can figure. Later, Marnie
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
I'd like to see some footnotes on their "facts". Don't think I'm insensitive, but how the hell do you even claim a hard percentage on an unreported crime. It's unreported! At best it's an educated guess, at worst it's a number someone pulled out of their a**. It's not surprising that a major joke is that 42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.rainn.org/statistics/index.html Marnie aka Doe -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Marnie, I wonder how many of the crimes are committed multiple times by those being released back onto the flanks of society. Obviously, terms of sentences and rehab (yeah, right) facilities are woefully inadequate. Most troubling thing is that the law often allows for a stiffer sentence than is imposed. Some will never "get it". Jack --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > http://www.rainn.org/statistics/index.html > > Marnie aka Doe > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
http://www.rainn.org/statistics/index.html Marnie aka Doe
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
It is an extremely thin surface and the idea of "erring on the side of caution", as the justifying statement goes, there is a tendency to take no prisoners in the wake of a rush to justice. Jack --- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not to disparage anyone's profession... it's generally recognized > that many > (not all) in the... I'll tread lightly... Child Welfare profession... > had > troubled if not abusive childhoods themselves. Therefore some have a > > proclivity to see things that don't exist and/or to become some kind > of > champions of childrens' rights, thereby trampling on the rights of > all, > parents, children, families. > > > > Tom C. > > > > > >From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > >To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > >Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded > >Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:15:56 - > > > >Here is an example of people rushing wrongly to judgement. A local > > >council removed children from their families because some idiot > believed > >rumours about satanism. The consequences were devastating. > > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4602268.stm > > > >There are always far too many people ready to believe the worst, > however > >nonsensical. > > > >John > > > >PS: Jack - I thought you were being serious. Apologies. Moral: > don't > >forget the smiley. Not all list members were lucky enough to attend > a US > >High School. :-) > > > > > >On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:13:38 -, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > >>Okay, chase is over. > >> > >>Jack > >> > >>--- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Jack Davis wrote: > >>> > >>> > You're right, it was Kostas who used the "personal tone". My > >>>apologies, > >>> > Rob. > >>> > Kostas? > >>> > >>>No, no personal tone in the "gut feeling" statement, went for a > joke > >>>that did not quite work. The "metrics" part you have answered. The > >>>"humorist" comment is John's. > >>> > >>>Kostas > >>> > >>> > Jack > >>> > > >>> > --- David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Ahh... Rob didn't say that. He said: > >>> >> > >>> >> "Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too" > >>> >> > >>> >> This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss > >>>quoted. > >>> >> > >>> >> Dave > >>> >> > >>> >> On 1/11/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> >>> As you say, you're missing some posts. > >>> >>> The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up > >>> >> (professed) > >>> >>> in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the > >>>reaction. > >>> >>> Rob, why the personal tone? > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Jack > >>> >>> > >>> >>> --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> >>> > >>> >>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert > >>> >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> wrote: > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>>> On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>>> US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best > one > >>> >> in > >>> >>>> the > >>> >>>>>>> world. > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> Rob Studdert > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a > short, > >>> >> and > >>> >>>> rather > >>> >>>>> selective, memory. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the > >>> >> metrics > >>> >>>> you > >>> >>>> are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's > full > >>> >> of. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Kostas > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> __ > >>> >>> Do You Yahoo!? > >>> >>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection > around > >>> >>> http://mail.yahoo.com > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > __ > >>> > Do You Yahoo!? > >>> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > >>> > http://mail.yahoo.com > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >>__ > >>Do You Yahoo!? > >>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > >>http://mail.yahoo.com > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >-- > >Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Not at all. No problem! Thanks, Jack --- John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is an example of people rushing wrongly to judgement. A local > council removed children from their families because some idiot > believed > rumours about satanism. The consequences were devastating. > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4602268.stm > > There are always far too many people ready to believe the worst, > however > nonsensical. > > John > > PS: Jack - I thought you were being serious. Apologies. Moral: > don't > forget the smiley. Not all list members were lucky enough to attend > a US > High School. :-) > > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:13:38 -, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Okay, chase is over. > > > > Jack > > > > --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Jack Davis wrote: > >> > >> > You're right, it was Kostas who used the "personal tone". My > >> apologies, > >> > Rob. > >> > Kostas? > >> > >> No, no personal tone in the "gut feeling" statement, went for a > joke > >> that did not quite work. The "metrics" part you have answered. The > >> "humorist" comment is John's. > >> > >> Kostas > >> > >> > Jack > >> > > >> > --- David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Ahh... Rob didn't say that. He said: > >> >> > >> >> "Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too" > >> >> > >> >> This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss > >> quoted. > >> >> > >> >> Dave > >> >> > >> >> On 1/11/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >>> As you say, you're missing some posts. > >> >>> The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up > >> >> (professed) > >> >>> in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the > >> reaction. > >> >>> Rob, why the personal tone? > >> >>> > >> >>> Jack > >> >>> > >> >>> --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >>> > >> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: > >> > >> > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best > one > >> >> in > >> the > >> >>> world. > >> >> > >> >> Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Rob Studdert > >> > > >> > > >> > He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a > short, > >> >> and > >> rather > >> > selective, memory. > >> > >> I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the > >> >> metrics > >> you > >> are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. > >> > >> If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's > full > >> >> of. > >> > >> Kostas > >> > >> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> __ > >> >>> Do You Yahoo!? > >> >>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection > around > >> >>> http://mail.yahoo.com > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > __ > >> > Do You Yahoo!? > >> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > >> > http://mail.yahoo.com > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Tom C wrote: From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> While we're at it, lobotomize idiots. What would be the point in that? I'll get back to you on that... I just sent a request for volunteers to the Kodak Disc Camera Users Group. I'm sure someone will want the opportunity. Tom C. I guess they'd qualify since it's hard to "use" a camera for which there's no film. frank theriault wrote: On 1/10/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Someone proven by the courts to be guilty is likely to be guilty. I'm happy with the risk he might be innocent. Balls away! And I say let's bring back forced sterilization of mental deficients. While we're at it, lobotomize idiots. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
I guess that's better then... frank theriault wrote: On 1/11/06, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What would be the point in that? Okay, not idiots (because generally, we're pretty docile). Lobotomize schizophrenics. That better? cheers, frank, who was just using hyperbole to make a point... ps: hyperbole does not rhyme with Superbowl. -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Interesting that the social workers involved, who created this mess, are now being protected: "BBC lawyer David Attfield told Today that the injunction had prevented the naming of social workers to avoid identification by association of the families." Seems to me that the people who caused the problem should be required to take some heat for their actions. Too often the busybodies and beaurocrats who create problems for others just walk away unscathed. Perhaps if they knew there'd be some consequences because of their actions, they'd be a little more cautious. Shel > [Original Message] > From: John Forbes > Here is an example of people rushing wrongly to judgement. A local > council removed children from their families because some idiot believed > rumours about satanism. The consequences were devastating. > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4602268.stm > > There are always far too many people ready to believe the worst, however > nonsensical.
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Foreign policy is that way in every country. Just some are more straight forward than others. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "John Francis" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded The US Justice system isn't designed to provide justice. A better name would be Punishment & Revenge system. That could also be an apt describer of the foreign policy system, but I digress. William Robb -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Legally if you are charged and found guilty, you are guilty. That's a tautology. Whether you've committed the crime that you're guilty of is beside the point. In most of the English speaking world, you're not guilty until after the trial, and until the finder of fact makes it's declaration, your guilt is in doubt. At least that's how it's supposed to work in theory. William Robb wrote: - Original Message ----- From: "Shel Belinkoff" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded While some say that if you're charged and found guilty, you're more than likely guilty. Hell, some say if you know a person charged, you are guilty by association. William Robb -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is an example of people rushing wrongly to judgement. A local > council removed children from their families because some idiot believed > rumours about satanism. The consequences were devastating. > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4602268.stm > > There are always far too many people ready to believe the worst, however > nonsensical. It even happens in sleepy small town Saskatchewan, Canada (I'm sure Wheatfield is familiar with this one): http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/martin/ All it takes is an enthusiastic social worker, a police force afraid to be seen as "ignoring" so-called signs of sex abuse, an overzealous prosecutor, and lives are ruined... cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Not to disparage anyone's profession... it's generally recognized that many (not all) in the... I'll tread lightly... Child Welfare profession... had troubled if not abusive childhoods themselves. Therefore some have a proclivity to see things that don't exist and/or to become some kind of champions of childrens' rights, thereby trampling on the rights of all, parents, children, families. Tom C. From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:15:56 - Here is an example of people rushing wrongly to judgement. A local council removed children from their families because some idiot believed rumours about satanism. The consequences were devastating. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4602268.stm There are always far too many people ready to believe the worst, however nonsensical. John PS: Jack - I thought you were being serious. Apologies. Moral: don't forget the smiley. Not all list members were lucky enough to attend a US High School. :-) On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:13:38 -, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Okay, chase is over. Jack --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Jack Davis wrote: > You're right, it was Kostas who used the "personal tone". My apologies, > Rob. > Kostas? No, no personal tone in the "gut feeling" statement, went for a joke that did not quite work. The "metrics" part you have answered. The "humorist" comment is John's. Kostas > Jack > > --- David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Ahh... Rob didn't say that. He said: >> >> "Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too" >> >> This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss quoted. >> >> Dave >> >> On 1/11/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> As you say, you're missing some posts. >>> The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up >> (professed) >>> in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the reaction. >>> Rob, why the personal tone? >>> >>> Jack >>> >>> --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one >> in >>>> the >>>>>>> world. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Rob Studdert >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, >> and >>>> rather >>>>> selective, memory. >>>> >>>> I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the >> metrics >>>> you >>>> are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. >>>> >>>> If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's full >> of. >>>> >>>> Kostas >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> __ >>> Do You Yahoo!? >>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >>> http://mail.yahoo.com >>> >>> >> >> > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
They should be sued for all they're worth collectively and individually. And then kicked out and banned from their profession. Those kind of people are so blinded by their zeal, that they don't begin to consider the harm they cause by taking unfounded action. I could find you scores of similar news stories in the US. Tom C. From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:15:56 - Here is an example of people rushing wrongly to judgement. A local council removed children from their families because some idiot believed rumours about satanism. The consequences were devastating. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4602268.stm There are always far too many people ready to believe the worst, however nonsensical. John PS: Jack - I thought you were being serious. Apologies. Moral: don't forget the smiley. Not all list members were lucky enough to attend a US High School. :-) On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:13:38 -, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Okay, chase is over. Jack --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Jack Davis wrote: > You're right, it was Kostas who used the "personal tone". My apologies, > Rob. > Kostas? No, no personal tone in the "gut feeling" statement, went for a joke that did not quite work. The "metrics" part you have answered. The "humorist" comment is John's. Kostas > Jack > > --- David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Ahh... Rob didn't say that. He said: >> >> "Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too" >> >> This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss quoted. >> >> Dave >> >> On 1/11/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> As you say, you're missing some posts. >>> The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up >> (professed) >>> in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the reaction. >>> Rob, why the personal tone? >>> >>> Jack >>> >>> --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one >> in >>>> the >>>>>>> world. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Rob Studdert >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, >> and >>>> rather >>>>> selective, memory. >>>> >>>> I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the >> metrics >>>> you >>>> are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. >>>> >>>> If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's full >> of. >>>> >>>> Kostas >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> __ >>> Do You Yahoo!? >>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >>> http://mail.yahoo.com >>> >>> >> >> > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Here is an example of people rushing wrongly to judgement. A local council removed children from their families because some idiot believed rumours about satanism. The consequences were devastating. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4602268.stm There are always far too many people ready to believe the worst, however nonsensical. John PS: Jack - I thought you were being serious. Apologies. Moral: don't forget the smiley. Not all list members were lucky enough to attend a US High School. :-) On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:13:38 -, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Okay, chase is over. Jack --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Jack Davis wrote: > You're right, it was Kostas who used the "personal tone". My apologies, > Rob. > Kostas? No, no personal tone in the "gut feeling" statement, went for a joke that did not quite work. The "metrics" part you have answered. The "humorist" comment is John's. Kostas > Jack > > --- David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Ahh... Rob didn't say that. He said: >> >> "Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too" >> >> This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss quoted. >> >> Dave >> >> On 1/11/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> As you say, you're missing some posts. >>> The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up >> (professed) >>> in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the reaction. >>> Rob, why the personal tone? >>> >>> Jack >>> >>> --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: >> >>> US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one >> in the >>> world. >> >> Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) >> >> >> Rob Studdert > > > He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, >> and rather > selective, memory. I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the >> metrics you are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's full >> of. Kostas >>> >>> >>> __ >>> Do You Yahoo!? >>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >>> http://mail.yahoo.com >>> >>> >> >> > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
You still feel frustrated by your insecurity? Don't do it again and you may just get away with it..whatever "it" is. Jack --- William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Jack Davis" > Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded > > > > How so? > > To start with, advocating the persecution of people who have not been > > charged with a crime. > > William Robb > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> While we're at it, lobotomize idiots. What would be the point in that? I'll get back to you on that... I just sent a request for volunteers to the Kodak Disc Camera Users Group. I'm sure someone will want the opportunity. Tom C. frank theriault wrote: On 1/10/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Someone proven by the courts to be guilty is likely to be guilty. I'm happy with the risk he might be innocent. Balls away! And I say let's bring back forced sterilization of mental deficients. While we're at it, lobotomize idiots. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- When you're worried or in doubt,Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What would be the point in that? Okay, not idiots (because generally, we're pretty docile). Lobotomize schizophrenics. That better? cheers, frank, who was just using hyperbole to make a point... ps: hyperbole does not rhyme with Superbowl. -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
While we're at it, lobotomize idiots. What would be the point in that? frank theriault wrote: On 1/10/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Someone proven by the courts to be guilty is likely to be guilty. I'm happy with the risk he might be innocent. Balls away! And I say let's bring back forced sterilization of mental deficients. While we're at it, lobotomize idiots. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "Jack Davis" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded How so? To start with, advocating the persecution of people who have not been charged with a crime. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "John Francis" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded The US Justice system isn't designed to provide justice. A better name would be Punishment & Revenge system. That could also be an apt describer of the foreign policy system, but I digress. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
- Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded While some say that if you're charged and found guilty, you're more than likely guilty. Hell, some say if you know a person charged, you are guilty by association. William Robb
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Okay, chase is over. Jack --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Jack Davis wrote: > > > You're right, it was Kostas who used the "personal tone". My > apologies, > > Rob. > > Kostas? > > No, no personal tone in the "gut feeling" statement, went for a joke > that did not quite work. The "metrics" part you have answered. The > "humorist" comment is John's. > > Kostas > > > Jack > > > > --- David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Ahh... Rob didn't say that. He said: > >> > >> "Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too" > >> > >> This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss > quoted. > >> > >> Dave > >> > >> On 1/11/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> As you say, you're missing some posts. > >>> The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up > >> (professed) > >>> in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the > reaction. > >>> Rob, why the personal tone? > >>> > >>> Jack > >>> > >>> --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: > > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > >> On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: > >> > >>> US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one > >> in > the > >>> world. > >> > >> Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) > >> > >> > >> Rob Studdert > > > > > > He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, > >> and > rather > > selective, memory. > > I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the > >> metrics > you > are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. > > If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's full > >> of. > > Kostas > > > >>> > >>> > >>> __ > >>> Do You Yahoo!? > >>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > >>> http://mail.yahoo.com > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 06:31:13AM -0500, Bob Shell wrote: > > On Jan 10, 2006, at 10:41 PM, Tom C wrote: > > >I would venture to say that none of us wants to see a guilty party > >go free. Speaking for myself, I even more so, don't want to see an > >innocent party found guilty and punished. > > > >The first case is most likely one of justice (or retribution) > >postponed. The second case is plain and simple injustice. > > > Thomas Jefferson said that it was better for 100 guilty men to go > free than for one innocent man to be imprisoned. We've lost sight of > that these days. > > Bob The US Justice system isn't designed to provide justice. A better name would be Punishment & Revenge system.
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Jack Davis wrote: You're right, it was Kostas who used the "personal tone". My apologies, Rob. Kostas? No, no personal tone in the "gut feeling" statement, went for a joke that did not quite work. The "metrics" part you have answered. The "humorist" comment is John's. Kostas Jack --- David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ahh... Rob didn't say that. He said: "Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too" This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss quoted. Dave On 1/11/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: As you say, you're missing some posts. The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up (professed) in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the reaction. Rob, why the personal tone? Jack --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in the world. Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) Rob Studdert He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, and rather selective, memory. I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the metrics you are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's full of. Kostas __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Huh? You calling me sheepish? Ewe're being a ba-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-d boy. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Huh? You calling me sheepish? Dave :-) On 1/11/06, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/11/06, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > They're you go again! > > Or, perhaps I should have said: They're ewe go a gain... > > > > -frank > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > >
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
From what I've heard, here in the US, there are states that forcibly administer this medication while in prison. Some criminals voluntarily enter the program because of the inability to repress the predatory cravings. P. J. Alling wrote: This depends upon the "criminal" medicating himself. There's a flaw in this somewhere... Gonz wrote: I dont know how well it works, but there is also the option of chemical castration, which supposedly is reversible. Cotty wrote: The signs are fairly good that this thread could soon involve abortion, guns, and the big G-guy up there, so I'm skipping orf out of it. I take back what i said earlier about chopping balls off. I'll give some ground and just go for the one bollock then. Still give the guy a chance in the future, but let's face it - one chopped off - it's gotta hurt :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > They're you go again! Or, perhaps I should have said: They're ewe go a gain... -frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > oops...LOL > > I'd prefer miss quoted...but to each there own. > > ;-) They're you go again! -frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
You're right, it was Kostas who used the "personal tone". My apologies, Rob. Kostas? Jack --- David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ahh... Rob didn't say that. He said: > > "Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too" > > This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss quoted. > > Dave > > On 1/11/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As you say, you're missing some posts. > > The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up > (professed) > > in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the reaction. > > Rob, why the personal tone? > > > > Jack > > > > --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one > in > > > the > > > >>> world. > > > >> > > > >> Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Rob Studdert > > > > > > > > > > > > He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, > and > > > rather > > > > selective, memory. > > > > > > I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the > metrics > > > you > > > are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. > > > > > > If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's full > of. > > > > > > Kostas > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
oops...LOL I'd prefer miss quoted...but to each there own. ;-) Dave On 1/11/06, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/11/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss quoted. > > That's Mister Quoted to you, buddy! > > cheers, > frank > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > >
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss quoted. That's Mister Quoted to you, buddy! cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Ahh... Rob didn't say that. He said: "Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too" This is the problem with chopping emails up, people get miss quoted. Dave On 1/11/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As you say, you're missing some posts. > The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up (professed) > in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the reaction. > Rob, why the personal tone? > > Jack > > --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: > > >> > > >>> US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in > > the > > >>> world. > > >> > > >> Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) > > >> > > >> > > >> Rob Studdert > > > > > > > > > He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, and > > rather > > > selective, memory. > > > > I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the metrics > > you > > are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. > > > > If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's full of. > > > > Kostas > > > > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > >
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, Bob Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Jefferson said that it was better for 100 guilty men to go > free than for one innocent man to be imprisoned. We've lost sight of > that these days. > > Bob Sir William Blackstone, an approximate contemporary of Jefferson, is to have said: "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." Same sentiment. No matter who may have said it first, I'm with you, Bob. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
As you say, you're missing some posts. The statement is a parroting of a formula comment picked up (professed) in high school. It was offered with a curiosity about the reaction. Rob, why the personal tone? Jack --- Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: > > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > >> On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: > >> > >>> US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in > the > >>> world. > >> > >> Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) > >> > >> > >> Rob Studdert > > > > > > He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, and > rather > > selective, memory. > > I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the metrics > you > are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. > > If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's full of. > > Kostas > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
How so? Jack --- Bob Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 10, 2006, at 10:41 PM, Tom C wrote: > > > I would venture to say that none of us wants to see a guilty party > > > go free. Speaking for myself, I even more so, don't want to see an > > > innocent party found guilty and punished. > > > > The first case is most likely one of justice (or retribution) > > postponed. The second case is plain and simple injustice. > > > Thomas Jefferson said that it was better for 100 guilty men to go > free than for one innocent man to be imprisoned. We've lost sight of > > that these days. > > Bob > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/11/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While some say that if you're charged and found guilty, you're more than > likely guilty. > > However, in recent years, DNA testing, various civil liberty groups, > attorneys with a cause, and so on, have found that a greater percentage of > the guilty than ever before thought, were innocent. > > Locking someone up for life seems a good alternative to having then "drawn > and quartered." Absolutely, Shel. My personal philosophy actually goes beyond what you say, beyond what I said in my previous post: "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer", said English jurist Sir William Blackmore, and I agree... cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
While some say that if you're charged and found guilty, you're more than likely guilty. However, in recent years, DNA testing, various civil liberty groups, attorneys with a cause, and so on, have found that a greater percentage of the guilty than ever before thought, were innocent. Locking someone up for life seems a good alternative to having then "drawn and quartered." Shel > [Original Message] > From: frank theriault > Until the justice system is 100% effective (which it never ever can > be, due to human error) we must avoid permanent punishments, such as > execution, castration, lobotomy, etc. It's only humane...
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/10/06, Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some poor bastard in Virginia was executed. They are doing DNA testing > now to prove his innocence (sorry haven't followed up; don't know if was > completed or not). Sometimes the courts fail. > > Here in Canada, we've had several cases over the past few decades where an accused was found guilty of murder, languished in jail for some time (20 years, in one case), and was later found to be not guilty. Luckily, we don't have the death penalty in this country. David Milgaard, Donald Marshall, Paul Moran and Steven Truscott are but four of them. Luckily for them, modern DNA forensic science, jailhouse confessions by the real murderer and persistent relatives and lawyers on the outside finally proved their innocence. It's tragic enough that the state took years or decades away from them, but at least they weren't executed. Until the justice system is 100% effective (which it never ever can be, due to human error) we must avoid permanent punishments, such as execution, castration, lobotomy, etc. It's only humane... cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On 1/10/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Someone proven by the courts to be guilty is likely to be guilty. I'm > happy with the risk he might be innocent. Balls away! And I say let's bring back forced sterilization of mental deficients. While we're at it, lobotomize idiots. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
John Forbes wrote: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in the world. Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) Rob Studdert Judge Judy is a member of the entertainment industry these days. It's just *possible* that she didn't behave quite as outrageously when she was actually on the Bench.
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in the world. Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) Rob Studdert He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, and rather selective, memory. I missed the original post. Jack, I am wondering about the metrics you are using to deduce that it's the best in the world. If you tell me "gut feeling", I should remind you what it's full of. Kostas
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On Jan 10, 2006, at 10:41 PM, Tom C wrote: I would venture to say that none of us wants to see a guilty party go free. Speaking for myself, I even more so, don't want to see an innocent party found guilty and punished. The first case is most likely one of justice (or retribution) postponed. The second case is plain and simple injustice. Thomas Jefferson said that it was better for 100 guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be imprisoned. We've lost sight of that these days. Bob
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in the world. Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) Rob Studdert He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis. But he has a short, and rather selective, memory. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
On Jan 11, 2006, at 1:58 PM, Tom C wrote: It gets worse when the accusing party is an arm of the government, the same government of which the judicial branch is an arm, and the judge knows the accusing party on a regular first name basis. This is a long-ish read... but probably not surprising for anyone who's dealt with tax departments :) http://www.aardvark.co.nz/daily/2003/1201.shtml - Dave
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Yes, the word was there for a reason. Jack --- "E.R.N. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > William Robb wrote: > > > > > - Original Message ----- From: "Jack Davis" Subject: RE: > Vigilant > > or Bloody Minded > > > > > >> You don't seriously think that one would receive a 23 year prison > >> sentence simply for "stealing a black and white TV"? > >> Until you review that assumption, further rational discussion > would be > >> hopeless. > > > > > > > > You've never heard of the "3 strikes" laws? > > That would remove "simply" from the situation. > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Referenced that in a reply to Shel. Jack --- William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Jack Davis" > Subject: RE: Vigilant or Bloody Minded > > > > You don't seriously think that one would receive a 23 year prison > > sentence simply for "stealing a black and white TV"? > > Until you review that assumption, further rational discussion would > be > > hopeless. > > > You've never heard of the "3 strikes" laws? > > William Robb > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Judy speaks for me, boy. :-/ Jack --- Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote: > > > US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in > the > > world. > > Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-) > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
