Depressing injustice

carlybabe1

Am I the only one who feels despair when I see these kinds of headlines? It makes me wonder WTF is wrong with the system, when innocent babies are brutally murdered, and their murderer is polished up before being sent back out into society, without even showing remorse

http://current.com/items/90659818_baby-ps-mum-to-get-stylist-and-personal-trainer-when-shes-freed.htm

Morlar

It'd take more than a stylist and a trainer to stop her from being a hideously ugly trainwreck of an excuse for a human being.

carlybabe1

Morlar wrote: »

It'd take more than a stylist and a trainer to stop her from being a hideously ugly trainwreck of an excuse for a human being.

Well thats true, but what about the injustice of it, she's planning holidays ffs, and not a thought in the world about her other kids. Not to mention her boyfriend was convicted of raping a two year old girl, but she got off, I mean seriously
Its so depressing, it made me cry just reading it, and the gory details of what they done.

mjg

I know that it's an ethical minefield, sliding slopes and grey areas but I wonder will "civilisation" ever get to a point where the rights of the individual, capable of this kind of cruelty become secondary to a moral standard of some sort. People who are capable of this kind of abuse of a child, particularly their own child have no moral compass IMO, what to do with them, in anyway a practical sense.

Not to hijack the thread, but to illustrate the slidiing scale of badness (for want of a better word)...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8196546.stm

ChocolateSauce

That is easily explained by the broad statement "something went horribly wrong in her life to make her into this monster."

What is more disturbing is that she probably needs protection from society; it doesn't reflect well on civilisation.

mjg

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

That is easily explained by the broad statement "something went horribly wrong in her life to make her into this monster."

What is more disturbing is that she probably needs protection from society; it doesn't reflect well on civilisation.

She may have had horrible experiences in the past, she may not. For the purposes of this, I will assume that she has been warped by past abuse herself.

BTW, her co-abusers, her husband and brother-in law should get a mention. Newspaper reports stated that they threatened and psychologically abused their grandmother to change her will in their favour, including locking her in a wardrobe at least once (trying to be accurate) and wearing masks to intimidate her.

If we don't find a way to stop the cycle of the abused becoming the abuser, we will just keep seeing these horror stories. Estimates of the ratio of actual abuse compared to reported abuse is so large that we don't know where to apply measures, never mind what measures to apply, to stop these horrors being repeated.

However, if there ever comes a time where, in the absence of proven methods to end these cycles, people don't feel an evolutionary instinct of revulsion and anger, even to the point where this womans safety is an issue, I don't want to be a part of that civilisation.

IMO there's more humanity in wishing her harm than hoping that she comes through this safely.

carlybabe1

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

That is easily explained by the broad statement "something went horribly wrong in her life to make her into this monster."

What is more disturbing is that she probably needs protection from society; it doesn't reflect well on civilisation.

TBH, Id have to disagree with this, I reckon that its normal for people to feel outraged and angry over this case, over how that baby suffered, and how she now is being treated. They are getting her a personal trainer ffs, and a stylist, and changing her identity, all to protect her from the public. Where were these resources for her son, when he should have been protected, he was left to suffer horrendous abuse while his Mammy looked the other way....seriously, whats wrong with this picture. Id much rather be living in a society where people still recognise injustice, than one that always looks for "reasons" as to why this happens, because the idea of a human being able to do these kinds of things for no reason is frightening. And the abuse thing is a crock imo, not every abused child turns into a monster

mjg

carlybabe1 wrote: »

And the abuse thing is a crock imo, not every abused child turns into a monster

+1

Zombrex

Stop reading the headlines is an easy solution to that problem

gogglebok

carlybabe1 wrote: »

They are getting her a personal trainer ffs, and a stylist, and changing her identity, all to protect her from the public.

1. "They" are doing no such thing. A Sky News website reported that this is the kind of thing which is likely to happen, and failed utterly to cite one source. In terms of credibiliity this is above being whispered to by an elf, but not far above it.

2. Do you really believe that she shouldn't be protected from murderous attacks, if that proves necessary?

ChocolateSauce

mjg wrote: »

She may have had horrible experiences in the past, she may not. For the purposes of this, I will assume that she has been warped by past abuse herself.

Just let me expand on that by saying "something horribly wrong" can also be extended to neural wiring which happened in the womb. You're right, I was singling her out, without realising it. I meant the same for all of them.

IMO there's more humanity in wishing her harm than hoping that she comes through this safely.

I couldn't disagree more, that's just revenge under the guise of justice, justice which can never be done IMO. It is too late to be worrying about them, I was worried about those who might attack them. It would be a shame if people would lower themselves out of a noble but misplaced and misappropriated sense of righteousness by taking the law into their own hands.

There is nothing humane about further hate.

carlybabe wrote:

I reckon that its normal for people to feel outraged and angry over this case

Of course it is. I feel disgusted by this, but I would also be disgusted if a person murdered them out of their own hate. The old maxim "two wrongs don't make a right" is of prime meaning here. I wouldn't feel sorry for the abusers, but for the good person who had done a bad thing.

And the abuse thing is a crock imo, not every abused child turns into a monster

Also, not sure if this was aimed at me, but I never suggested such a thing. I never even suggested they were abused, just that something unspecified had gone wrong, be it lack of guidance, mental sickness, abuse or what have you.

Porkpie

ChocolateSauce, if you had a little baby who received similar treatment can you honestly say you would still hold the same beliefs?

The Corinthian

carlybabe1 wrote: »

Am I the only one who feels despair when I see these kinds of headlines? It makes me wonder WTF is wrong with the system, when innocent babies are brutally murdered, and their murderer is polished up before being sent back out into society, without even showing remorse

Assuming that the story has not been exaggerated, it is regrettably necessary nowadays. Remember, once she has served the sentience that law deems necessary, she is entitled to continue living her life.

Such is the hysteria that surrounds sensational cases like this - especially anything involving children - that vigilante type 'justice' is highly likely. Of course, if vigilante type 'justice' was unlikely, then (as with most ex-cons) she would not receive any such treatment. As such society has to protect her too, after all she's paid her debt by then.

And if you do not believe that she has paid her debt, then it comes down to changing the law, not taking it into your own hands.

ChocolateSauce

Porkpie wrote: »

ChocolateSauce, if you had a little baby who received similar treatment can you honestly say you would still hold the same beliefs?

I can't speculate because I don't have a baby. I would certainly hope that I'd stick to my ethics in any situation though, and I am opposed intrinsically to hysteria and moral panic because they explicitly mean the abandonment of rational thought in favour of our emotions- exactly the kind of thing that leads to crimes of passion.

Dudess

A person's emotions shouldn't dictate the justice system, it's supposed to be objective.

And believing that stuff about a personal trainer etc is being a tad silly. It's just retarded bullsh1t from a dumb-fuk website. Like, who the **** would sanction/finance a personal trainer for her?!

Believe me, even the "bleeding heart do-gooder liberal leftie right-on hand-wringing" bla bla people who don't think the state should torture her to death wouldn't want her to have a personal trainer and make-over when she gets out.

metrovelvet

Dudess wrote: »

A person's emotions shouldn't dictate the justice system, it's supposed to be objective.

And believing that stuff about a personal trainer etc is being a tad silly. It's just retarded bullsh1t from a dumb-fuk website. Like, who the **** would sanction/finance a personal trainer for her?!

Believe me, even the "bleeding heart do-gooder liberal leftie right-on hand-wringing" bla bla people who don't think the state should torture her to death would want her to have a personal trainer and make-over when she gets out.

Actually they would because of mob mentallity who would want to seek their own justice [revenge but civilized]. [recall the Eumendes - when justice isnt served, vengeance is sought].

So in our beloved democracy, she has paid her debt to society and will be a "free" woman whose identity will need to be protected.

This is of course the rational side of me speaking, the very strong not so rational side of me, thinks dont get her a personal trainer, this isnt a problem a magnum [and I dont mean the ice cream] wouldn't solve.

ChocolateSauce

metrovelvet wrote: »

she will be a "free" woman whose identity will need to be protected.

Yes. She'll still be a dirty scumbag, but this doesn't change this fact, and it would be a crime to harm her, regardless of whether or not she deserves it. We can't suspend the legal system when we think it fails. It is an imperfect system designed to be as fair as possible to the widest number of people. This means some people get hard done by while others get off light; most get a moderate sentence.

metrovelvet

Lets just all hope she doesnt have anymore kids.

irish_bob

she shouldnt recieve a face lift or whatever when she leaves prison , she doesnt deserve any of this no more than i do or someone who does a year for robbing a television , since when do people when they leave prison get all theese protections

Dudess

irish_bob wrote: »

she shouldnt recieve a face lift or whatever when she leaves prison

Well it's pretty doubtful she'll get one - seriously, that's just a rumour started by some Daily Mail type idiot who believes the justice system gives child abusers cells resembling luxury spas, because the justice system agrees with child abuse and believes it should be rewarded... or something.

irish_bob

Dudess wrote: »

Well it's pretty doubtful she'll get one - seriously, that's just a rumour started by some Daily Mail type idiot who believes the justice system gives child abusers cells resembling luxury spas, because the justice system agrees with child abuse and believes it should be rewarded... or something.

perhaps but the suggestion is that she will recieve special treatment when she gets out which most people who do time dont

Dudess

What sort of freak would deem it logical to give her special treatment? Just because sentences are too lenient does not mean child abuse is admired.

gogglebok

irish_bob wrote: »

since when do people when they leave prison get all these protections

Surely we want to live in a society where people are protected from violence. Whether they have just left prison is hardly the issue.

mjg

mjg wrote: »

IMO there's more humanity in wishing her harm than hoping that she comes through this safely.

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I couldn't disagree more, that's just revenge under the guise of justice, justice which can never be done IMO. It is too late to be worrying about them, I was worried about those who might attack them. It would be a shame if people would lower themselves out of a noble but misplaced and misappropriated sense of righteousness by taking the law into their own hands.

There is nothing humane about further hate.

Just to clarify where I was coming from with the above, I meant "humanity" more in terms of human-ness rather than humane-ness if that makes sense. From a basic gut-feeling of, "children are the future of the human race and this kind of crime is abhorent" kind of thing.

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

that's just revenge under the guise of justice

If you look at "justice" in a broader definition, outside of that applied to the woefully inadequate justice system in Ireland, there's an argument that justice, maybe natural justice, would be served by someone taking the law into their own hands.

I should be able to say that I would prefer to take the higher moral ground and not wish this woman harm but I'm a big enough person to say that I'm not that big a person.

I'm kind of happy about that....

ChocolateSauce

mjg wrote: »

If you look at "justice" in a broader definition, outside of that applied to the woefully inadequate justice system in Ireland, there's an argument that justice, maybe natural justice, would be served by someone taking the law into their own hands.

Natural justice? How does one define that? And how exactly does the individual gain the moral right to decide the fate of another, especially when that fate has already been decided by a court of law?

And how is our system woefully inadequate?

The problem is that people just want to complain about the system and not actually take a stand to change the system. The other issue is that any change to the system will be objected on the grounds of some other persons rights, or that its too harsh, or that it will be abused, or that it gives power into the wrong hands.

The point is that criminals get out without proper punishment because we have a system designed to be "fair". Its not about removing the danger from society. Its about seeking to reform them. Which is dodgy at the best of times. But this will not change as long as people are unwilling to allow harsher forms of punishment. Lets face it, the prison sector is over occupied in most countries, and hasn't shown much ability to properly reform offenders. But nobody really wants things to change, because that would require making a firm stand. :rolleyes:

irish_bob

gogglebok wrote: »

Surely we want to live in a society where people are protected from violence. Whether they have just left prison is hardly the issue.

my question is why do most people who leave prison not recieve the same protection

irish_bob

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

Natural justice? How does one define that? And how exactly does the individual gain the moral right to decide the fate of another, especially when that fate has already been decided by a court of law?

And how is our system woefully inadequate?

thier does seem to be a pattern of those who leave prison , reoffending or becoming bigger fish than when they went in

The Corinthian

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

Natural justice? How does one define that?

mjg

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

And how is our system woefully inadequate?

I have not, for as long as I can remember, seen what I would consider adequate prison terms given for crimes such as murder/manslaughter/unlawful killings, rape, sexual assault and child abuse/molestation etc. and as prison is the only deterrent that we have, I consider it to be inadequate.

If at least there were some noticable rehabilitation (percentage-wise) of offenders, I might have more faith in the justice system as it would be moving in the right direction. I'm not talking about prisoners who make mistakes that end in violence, I'm talking about individuals to whom life is cheap and prison is an occasional pitfall.

Failing to pay your TV licence fee or a parking ticket seem to be the only "crimes" who's punishment in anyway fits.

We are all human, we are all fallible, including those that establish and run our justice system and a perfect system is impossible, but we are entitled to be dissatisfied and feel un-protected by the current laws which imo exist almost exclusively to protect the rights of the convicted.

The Corinthian

mjg wrote: »

I have not, for as long as I can remember, seen what I would consider adequate prison terms given for crimes such as murder/manslaughter/unlawful killings, rape, sexual assault and child abuse/molestation etc. and as prison is the only deterrent that we have, I consider it to be inadequate.

If at least there were some noticable rehabilitation (percentage-wise) of offenders, I might have more faith in the justice system as it would be moving in the right direction. I'm not talking about prisoners who make mistakes that end in violence, I'm talking about individuals to whom life is cheap and prison is an occasional pitfall.

Failing to pay your TV licence fee or a parking ticket seem to be the only "crimes" who's punishment in anyway fits.

We are all human, we are all fallible, including those that establish and run our justice system and a perfect system is impossible, but we are entitled to be dissatisfied and feel un-protected by the current laws which imo exist almost exclusively to protect the rights of the convicted.

Indeed we are all human, we are all fallible, which is why the determination of law and justice is one that is taken out of individual human hands. As a case in point, your entire post has been based purely on opinion - I took the liberty of highlighting the relevant language.

Opinion is naturally your right, but only fools think that opinion alone makes for good public policy. Natural justice, as you called it is ultimately little more that the collective opinion of the mob - or would you consider this to be natural justice?

If people feel that a law is too lenient, or strict, then they should seek to change that law, not ignore it. Otherwise, everyone's opinion becomes equally valid and all law equally subordinate to anyone's opinion - ironically, even a child abusers opinion.

metrovelvet

Can someone fill me on on the sentencing here?

I thought she was sentenced to a five year minimum? And the boyfriend life for raping a two year old girl? [side question how do you get 5 years for murder and life for rape?]

How do the defense lawyers live with themselves?

Eulick D

No wonder they kept the identity of Tracey Connelly hidden from the world for so long...

She's got a face on her like a slapped baby.

mjg

The Corinthian wrote: »

Indeed we are all human, we are all fallible, which is why the determination of law and justice is one that is taken out of individual human hands. As a case in point, your entire post has been based purely on opinion - I took the liberty of highlighting the relevant language.

Opinion is naturally your right, but only fools think that opinion alone makes for good public policy. Natural justice, as you called it is ultimately little more that the collective opinion of the mob - or would you consider this to be natural justice?

If people feel that a law is too lenient, or strict, then they should seek to change that law, not ignore it. Otherwise, everyone's opinion becomes equally valid and all law equally subordinate to anyone's opinion - ironically, even a child abusers opinion.

My entire post is opinion and will remain just that until I overthrow the government and make it a blueprint for our justice system. This would be a very dry community if it was fact based; everybody could check out the facts and post corrections if necessary.

I am not advocating a system of vigilante justice, discussions of the justice system in this thread have arisen through discussion of the original post on how people feel about the Baby P. case.

metrovelvet

mjg wrote: »

My entire post is opinion and will remain just that until I overthrow the government and make it a blueprint for our justice system. This would be a very dry community if it was fact based; everybody could check out the facts and post corrections if necessary.

I am not advocating a system of vigilante justice, discussions of the justice system in this thread have arisen through discussion of the original post on how people feel about the Baby P. case.

Well this is it, when justice isn't served we have vigiliantism. And when people get angry enough about an injustice, they will take it into their own hands. Now, while it is wise to remain emotionally detached, so hard in a case like this, there is only so far one can go with this, which is why the judiciary must be so careful. I think with a five year sentence, they cocked it up and will see some very very angry people.

Do english jury's decide on the sentencing or just the verdict?

I can't really see what the issue is. We determine the level of our countrys justice system. It is our input that influences the manner of how our country is run. If the people of a country wanted to change the system/laws, then there is nothing to stop them. The only real thing I find stopping the population is motivation and also the ability to go the whole mile. Changes to the system would take time, and most people in our society tend to lose interest after a few weeks.

At the end of the day, it is our responsibility to make these changes. Passing the buck off onto the politicians is simple-minded. Because, lets face it, they haven't shown much good sense in the past, so why would they do so all of a sudden?

There is the concept of "freedom" and "civil rights" which have developed in the west over the last hundred years or so. This seriously gets in the way of effective punishment of offenders. I have no issue with prisoners rights, but if someone breaks the law, then they have chosen to not live by our standards. They should not receive the same rights as a person who has not broken the law. Simple.

Lastly. I don't favour any retribution or "justice" that does not come from recognised/official sources. That's a path towards anarchy. maybe someday, we'd have characters like those in The Punisher, or some twat thinking he was Batman...