Another grooming gang
Discussion
"Grooming pregnant mothers to abuse their babies"
I read and re-read these sort of sentences from the article and my mind seems to blank. I just cannot comprehend the mental process that leads to any sexual attraction towards a newborn.
It's almost like reading a very bad fantasy book where the author just imagines and makes-up fictional behaviours to make his/her story more "interesting" or rather more shocking to make sure the reader remembers something of a bad book.
I wish that all the hear-say bravado about prisons and their inmates' attitude towards peados were true.
I read and re-read these sort of sentences from the article and my mind seems to blank. I just cannot comprehend the mental process that leads to any sexual attraction towards a newborn.
It's almost like reading a very bad fantasy book where the author just imagines and makes-up fictional behaviours to make his/her story more "interesting" or rather more shocking to make sure the reader remembers something of a bad book.
I wish that all the hear-say bravado about prisons and their inmates' attitude towards peados were true.
KFC said:
I would have bet almost anything on them not being white British before I clicked that link. Because of the type of offence in general, and because of that fact it was posted on PH.
Whilst I understand your first point, I am mystified by your second point. As far as I can see PH has never condoned child abuse by any ethnic group. The fact that this appalling group has been caught should be applauded by all. The fact that its a white gang rather than an Asian gang is nothing to celebrate, nor score points over and nor does it detract from the seriousness of the activities by gangs of any race. If I have misunderstood your post then I apologise.
Axionknight said:
What about reversing their confessions?
People have in the past confessed to things they didn't do. Also if you're going to top people who pled guilty anyway, you're going to cause a huge burden on the already overloaded court system. People plead guilty for a reduction in sentence... now you'll have lengthy legal cases and victims being forced to relive it all in court. Do you think thats a good idea?Axionknight said:
KFC said:
We certainly don't need them; we do need a viable way to reverse wrongful convictions though.
What about reversing their confessions?irocfan said:
KFC said:
We certainly don't need them; we do need a viable way to reverse wrongful convictions though.
this ^^^^I suppose they could have disguised themselves in the videos they streamed.
Would it be possible just as the Civil Servant that was trolling Hillsborough and the Hillsborough victims was identified from their web use to identify the offenders due to being in the videos and the Internet trail?
I agree. There needs to be categorical, unambiguous evidence before we execute them.
Look at the FBI overstating hair matches over several years and the evidence being used in convictions that led to over 30 people being executed.
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 22 April 17:55
L
TTwiggy said:
If they were facing a death sentence it's likely they would not have confessed. Jury's are statistically much less likely to convict when death will be the outcome. The result might be guilty people walking free - possibly to offend again.
In the face of overwhelming evidence as is very often the case? Unlikely, I'd say. Of course due process and jury selections would all have to be reviewed were such a reality the case.carinaman said:
You'd think the video of them raping kids being streamed would be sufficient to identify them.
I suppose they could have disguised themselves in the videos they streamed.
Would it be possible just as the Civil Servant that was trolling Hillsborough and the Hillsborough victims was identified from their web use to identify the offenders due to being in the videos and the Internet trail?
I agree. There needs to be categorical, unambiguous evidence before we execute them.
Look at the FBI overstating hair matches over several years and the evidence being used in convictions that led to over 30 people being executed.
I've not read any details of this particular case so I don't know how "definitely guilty" they are, but its not really relevant. As if you want to start killing people you're going to need to draw a line somewhere as to when is "guilty enough". I suppose they could have disguised themselves in the videos they streamed.
Would it be possible just as the Civil Servant that was trolling Hillsborough and the Hillsborough victims was identified from their web use to identify the offenders due to being in the videos and the Internet trail?
I agree. There needs to be categorical, unambiguous evidence before we execute them.
Look at the FBI overstating hair matches over several years and the evidence being used in convictions that led to over 30 people being executed.
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 22 April 17:55
Personally if I was on a jury and you told me this case wasn't 'guilty enough' to go for a death penalty, I wouldn't be keen on convicting them at all.
Then you get all the other issues like in USA, shoot out with cops, people dying etc. if you've done something that may get you the needle, there is nothing to lose by trying to shoot your way out of it / run people over etc.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff