Posted on 04/02/2009 11:54:27 PM PDT by Chet 99
GLOVERSVILLE, N.Y. — A central New York man has been sentenced to 22 years to life in prison for a deadly stabbing he says was prompted by a pornographic video.
Randy Green said he was "not a bad person" as he was sentenced Thursday for slitting Ray Pike's throat Aug. 15 on a trail in Gloversville.
Green says he was psychologically affected by seeing the sexually explicit video, which he says depicted Pike with a young girl. Pike was a convicted sex offender who volunteered at local churches.
Defense lawyer Robert Abdella says a third man may have shown Green the video specifically to enrage him.
Fulton County District Attorney Louise Sira says police never found the tape.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
dang.
Yep. This is a really good idea. Sex offenders are so able to be rehabilitated. WHAT F^&KING CHURCH HIRES SEX OFFENDERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SO HELP ME GOD I WANT TO PHYSICALLY BEAT PEOPLE WHO DO THIS SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, I have heard some FReepers say that they would kill a guy like that (like the one supposedly on the sex tape). So, apparently it’s not an “uncommon” sentiment around here... :-)
Is that a defense? That’s an interesting question to put to the “FReeper jurors” here...
Apparently it isn’t much of a defense. It failed. Of course I am not familiar with the particulars of the case, but the defense seemed a bit suspect to me.
He could have as easily turned the predator in to authorities.
Well, I personally never thought it would be too much of a defense, even when hearing that certain FReepers would kill someone like that on sight. I thought we did away with vigilante justice a long time ago and that we are supposed to be a nation of laws. It just seems peculiar to me, that (on the one hand), FReepers want to uphold the Constitution and maintain that we are a nation of laws, while (on the other hand) being willing to engage in vigilante justice, having pre-determined the guilt or innocence of a person apart from the mechanisms of our legal system and the Constitution. It just seems odd to me...
I think one could make a compelling argument that those convicted of such crimes, when guilt is clearly demonstrated by incontrovertible evidence, probably should be killed.
That is not to say citizens should assemble with pitchforks and torches and do this. Yet, I can’t say, if effected by this on a personal level what I might do. As far as I know, this man was not personally involved who committed the murder.
I think what you are seeing is anger, exasperation, frustration or any combination of the three. I think when ordinary folks see these animals released only to re-offend, and in some cases, murder their victims, that brings a lot of emotion forward.
It is extremely difficult to discuss this in general terms. These cases can differ, some egregious beyond all humanity and then there are those who find themselves on the wrong end of the law. For example, a 20 year old and a 15 or 16 year old. This may very well violate the law but is quite different in scope and intent. It lacks the sickness and perversion as well as rape sans the technicality of the statutory variety.
You have seen, the guilty, not guilty posts when a female teacher is caught having sex with a student in the school. There is a definitive double standard and you will not see anyone advocating death for these teachers, particularly the more aesthetic offenders. I think, in the end we all know those offenses that are so egregious as to warrant death. Making a case for the death penalty is one thing, but taking justice into your own hands is another thing entirely.
There can be no doubt much of the anger is justified. You can’t cage a fox for a period, who has killed a chicken and then simply release him into the coop. The facts and the prevailing evidence clearly belie any such reasoning. Foxes will kill chickens if they are around them. This is what foxes do. Predators, predate, and when the evidence is solid without exception these predators must be incarcerated for life or excised. The unjust sentencing and then a subsequent offense is the source of this rage and anger you are seeing. Parole, plea deals and exoneration on technicality have built this house of anger.
That said, Alleged victims have lied. Tawana Brawley(sp) and the Duke case springs to mind. Clearly killing on sight would have been wrong in these cases. I think, for the most part, people are just blowing off steam at a justice system they think has failed the innocent.
The bottom line here is that all must go “through the legal system” as we have made it, and as given to us. Otherwise, we are not a nation of laws, but simply taking justice into our own hands (which is favored by certain Freepers, it does seem...). I just don’t agree with that. No matter what the crime, all must go through the system, and that’s *also* recognizing that our system *is specifically designed* to let the guilty go, in order that not many innocent get convicted. That’s a *fundamental basis* of our justice system, per the Constitution, and the way things were designed.
You’ve either got a theoretical system of justice that catches *all the guilty* and keeps them in jail, while sweeping up a good number of the innocent — or else — you get a certain number of guilty ones go free, in order that you spare as many of the innocent ones as possible. That’s the theory behind it — and I go for keeping as many innocent out of jail as possible and making it very difficult for the government to “convict” without a very good case against someone...
I wish I could so easily hold on to that thought. I just don't believe it any more. : (
Do the crime- do the time. No excuses.
Do the crime- do the time. No excuses.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.