What could they possibly get out of it??

ST*

This is disgusting.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/04012006/325/police-question-men-rape-3-yr-old-girl.html

C_Breeze

wow, some people have seriously warped minds.
thats sick. no normal person would even think about that sort of thing , let alone act on it.

omb0wyn5ehpij9

Sick, sick bastards

Vokes

They're only being questioned . You don't know if they did it.

Horrific experience for the child though.

C_Breeze

i wonder will the child remeber it when its older? ....i dont remeber anything from when i was 3

ST*

SofaKing wrote:

They're only being questioned . You don't know if they did it.Horrific experience for the child though.

Might be just questioning, but they know someone messed with that little girl.. doesnt matter what bloody age the offender is.

C_Breeze wrote:

i wonder will the child remeber it when its older? ....i dont remeber anything from when i was 3

Dont think she will remember that clearly. But it probably will effect her personality and trust.

LegacyUser

That is disgusting, how anyone could do that to a baby, or to anyone, of any age for that matter, is beyond me. Filthy, sick, perverted baxtards!

spiderlegs

Is they did that they deserve to die it the most painful, traumatic, soul and life destroying way.

Rb

That's f*cked up.

whiskeyman

rb_ie wrote:

That's f*cked up.

I remember reading that there's a belief by some in Africa (and maybe other AIDs/HIV affected countries) that sex with a virgin can cure you - "The Virgin Cure".
This has led to many rapes of young girls and babies.
Truly sickening.
http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2002/april/virgin.htm

Töpher

Revolting. I hope whoever did it is forced to live for years in neverending pain. Death is too good for scum like that.

jimmycrackcorm

I wouldn't fancy their life in prison if they get convicted - then they'll lean about rough justice.

Kernel

C_Breeze wrote:

i wonder will the child remeber it when its older? ....i dont remeber anything from when i was 3

Unfortunately, psychologically speaking, a child of that age is a tabula rasa, and absorbs all the experiences it witnesses. So even if there are no conscious memories of the event, I'm sure that it will have sank in psychologically. Same way fear responses and phobias can be developed from observing adults reactions when we are infants.

Anyway, goes without saying, but it's ****ing sick.

Doc_Savage

they shouldn't even make it to prison!!:mad:

Scraggs

poor child...... god i'm really upset over reading that, imagine what the poor kids gonna be like when its older!

[Jackass]

Scraggs wrote:

poor child...... god i'm really upset over reading that, imagine what the poor kids gonna be like when its older!

****! yeah good point...pretty much f**ked up!

I honestly believe anyone convicted of rape should be castrated. One sure fire way of not being able to re-offend and enough of a detturant that they'll probably think it's a better idea to get porn and hang out with pam and her 5 sisters...

I'm not taking the piss..i honestly believe that.

Standard Toaster

It's truely a f**ked up world. Jesus, only 3 years old.:(

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

Mossy Monk

they should have the dicks and balls cut off with a rusty knife. dirty bastards

kirving

I thnk there shold still be capitol punishment for serious crimes like that. And i hope they get VERY rough treatment in prison.

Endurance Man

whiskeyman wrote:

I remember reading that there's a belief by some in Africa (and maybe other AIDs/HIV affected countries) that sex with a virgin can cure you - "The Virgin Cure".
This has led to many rapes of young girls and babies.
Truly sickening.
http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2002/april/virgin.htm

Yup, this is a belief by many men of the black community in Africa. The amount of rapes in SA because of this is terrible .
How someone could live with themselves after raping a 3yr old is beyond me or any normal person, sick.

Custom22

The crime is perhaps one of the worst a person can commit. It is deeply sickening. Those responsible should be punished hard for what they have done; undoubtedly scarring a child for her entire life. I have already heard about it earlier so I have had some time for it to sink in and it is really hideous. The question of why these crimes actually happen is perhaps more disturbing than the crime itself.

I just asked myself though: At what age does it become less sick? In my opinion, when I really think about how scarring such an attack is, it is equally disgusting. I just find it more shocking with a small child as it is so much more uncommon and because a young child is not, in any way, seen as a sexual partner in the first place.

By the rational expressed by some, the rapists in this case should be killed, or more precisely, all those that inflict the same level of scarring on the victim, should be killed. If this is your opinion then that is, of course perfectly fine. Provided you can justify it then who the hell can argue with you really? However, if you can't, if you start finding flaws that is, then how can you talk about taking lives with this same doctrine of justice?

Think about what constitues a crime; the presence of a victim. That's what we are talking about here, the victim, not the crime. I think it's important to always keep the victim in mind and not the word "rape" or "assault".

Should all rapists be killed, that is all those convicted of rape, or all those that inflict the same level of trauma on their victims? This is the crux of it. I think it is more important to judge the crime by its effect on the victim. So technically, if a woman is beaten but not raped, but is traumatised to a comparable degree to another woman who is in fact raped, should then the assaulter be executed? If you believe so then that's acceptable, but you have to be one way or the other otherwise you are not being just. But how do we guage the victim's trauma? Especially in such a young child. It's very difficult to answer these questions, although I am sure they have answers.

I know it's the knee jerk reaction to want to eliminate these criminals from society and the fastest way to do it is by killing them, but whether we like it or not, there are always questions that arise out of punishing someone, and when you are dealing with human lives there can be no doubt or questions.

I was surprised at the level of sadism here but I suppose that is human nature and there is nothing wrong with that. I still don't believe that killing people is an ideal solution. Remove the threat from society, but killing, in my opinion, is, until you have absolute certainties in your system of justice, unjust.

Custom22

Endurance Man wrote:

Yup, this is a belief by many men of the black community in Africa.

The black community in Africa eh? 99% then.

JC 2K3

Custom22 wrote:

The crime is perhaps one of the worst a person can commit. It is deeply sickening. Those responsible should be punished hard for what they have done; undoubtedly scarring a child for her entire life. I have already heard about it earlier so I have had some time for it to sink in and it is really hideous. The question of why these crimes actually happen is perhaps more disturbing than the crime itself.

I just asked myself though: At what age does it become less sick? In my opinion, when I really think about how scarring such an attack is, it is equally disgusting. I just find it more shocking with a small child as it is so much more uncommon and because a young child is not, in any way, seen as a sexual partner in the first place.

By the rational expressed by some, the rapists in this case should be killed, or more precisely, all those that inflict the same level of scarring on the victim, should be killed. If this is your opinion then that is, of course perfectly fine. Provided you can justify it then who the hell can argue with you really? However, if you can't, if you start finding flaws that is, then how can you talk about taking lives with this same doctrine of justice?

Think about what constitues a crime; the presence of a victim. That's what we are talking about here, the victim, not the crime. I think it's important to always keep the victim in mind and not the word "rape" or "assault".

Should all rapists be killed, that is all those convicted of rape, or all those that inflict the same level of trauma on their victims? This is the crux of it. I think it is more important to judge the crime by its effect on the victim. So technically, if a woman is beaten but not raped, but is traumatised to a comparable degree to another woman who is in fact raped, should then the assaulter be executed? If you believe so then that's acceptable, but you have to be one way or the other otherwise you are not being just. But how do we guage the victim's trauma? Especially in such a young child. It's very difficult to answer these questions, although I am sure they have answers.

I know it's the knee jerk reaction to want to eliminate these criminals from society and the fastest way to do it is by killing them, but whether we like it or not, there are always questions that arise out of punishing someone, and when you are dealing with human lives there can be no doubt or questions.

I was surprised at the level of sadism here but I suppose that is human nature and there is nothing wrong with that. I still don't believe that killing people is an ideal solution. Remove the threat from society, but killing, in my opinion, is, until you have absolute certainties in your system of justice, unjust.

Most people wo reply to this topic don't think about it too much, the statements of, "They should be castrated with a rusty knife" or "They should be killed slowly and painfully" are merely reactions to a horrific crime. Given the task of debating the death penalty I'd say some of those posters would actually be against it.

Devon

Mossy Monk wrote:

they should have the dicks and balls cut off with a rusty knife. dirty bastards

...just for being detained and questioned? Do they get their parts back if found to be innocent?

Custom22

JC 2K3 wrote:

Most people wo reply to this topic don't think about it too much, the statements of, "They should be castrated with a rusty knife" or "They should be killed slowly and painfully" are merely reactions to a horrific crime. Given the task of debating the death penalty I'd say some of those posters would actually be against it.

You are proabaly right. But if violence is in people's hearts and they cannot be violent beacue they have not fully debated the issue in their mind and cannot back it up (I'm not accusing anyone here of this in particular), I think it's going to lead to stuff like this crime.

By looking at what you say flippantly, you can debate it, not necessarily with someone else, and possibly remove this want for violence, or at least rationalise it and be able to back it up. I don't think anyone should really stive to be non-violent, but rather comletely reasonable, rational and just. If that means violence and you can support that then fine. It does not to me however.

Mossy Monk

jerryadams wrote:

...just for being detained and questioned? Do they get their parts back if found to be innocent?

obviously if found guilty

AppleBack

Yahoo News wrote:

Police said the girl, who has not been named, remains in hospital were she is being treated for "significant injuries".

:eek: What the hell is wrong with this world.

ST*

jerryadams wrote:

...just for being detained and questioned?

Just for being detained and questioned?
You do realise that police dont pick you up for lookin' a bit dodgey don't you?

county

BrynW wrote:

Sick, sick bastards

yes and they should be kicked to death

thelordofcheese

Shock_treatment wrote:

Just for being detained and questioned?
You do realise that police dont pick you up for lookin' a bit dodgey don't you?

Yes, but being detained and questioned does not mean they are guilty. The point being we should probably hold off on the mutilation with rusty spoons until the men responsible have been tried and convicted.