Political Correctness gone mad

Old Bill

It's a disgrace that a father gets 40 years in jail simply for trying to protect his daughter against a sex beast. He did what any good father should do.

The law in America just like Ireland has got far too Political Correct and now sides with sex beasts and turns victims into criminals.

Hopefully when Mr Trump becomes president he can pardon this gentleman and maybe even give him a medal for his public service.

Father who shot dead his daughter's sexual abuser is sentenced to 40 years in jail after pleading guilty to save her from testifying

• Jay Maynor sentenced to 40 years for murdering his daughter's sex abuser
• Raymond Earl Brooks, 59, was shot dead in Alabama in June 2014
• He pleaded guilty in 2002 to sexually abusing Julia Maynor several times
• Brooks molested her constantly from the age of four until she was eight
• Pleaded guilty to the crimes in 2002, and served 27 months behind bars
• Ms Maynor said her father accepted sentence so she didn't have to testify
• 'My father was protecting me, like a father should do,' she said

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3943864/Alabama-father-shot-dead-daughter-s-sexual-abuser-sentenced-40-years-jail.html#ixzz4QISUWYmt
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

super_furry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99s19HBs-6A

Really don't think that's a case of political correctness. It's a case of a vigilante father being jailed for murder.

Now there's discussions to be had over why the paedophile's sentence was so short or why the father snapped 10 years after release and murdered him. There's probably a discussion to be had also over the post trial support offered to the victim and her family but I really don't think any of this is down to "political correctness".

dreamers75

Yeah thats murder.

10 years later.......

the groutch

Sentence is fully justified.
No matter how much of a scumbag someone is, it doesn't give you the right to hunt down and murder them.

Junkyard Tom

How in the name of muppetry is that an example of 'Political Correctness'?

Rented Mule

Brooks, her adopted maternal grandfather, pleaded guilty in 2002 to the crimes and served 27 months of a five-year sentence. He also paid restitution.

Ten years after he was freed, Maynor exacted his revenge and gunned Brooks down

I'm all for getting this scum off the streets, but this was premeditated murder ten years after he did his time.

On the way to Brooks' home, Maynor also fired his gun into a convenience store when he spotted a man who had been dating his stepdaughter and allegedly abused her.

This guy needs to be in prison.

Real crap weather here in Kerry.

Another example of political correctness gone mad.

GLaDOS

I blame Donald Trump.

And Brexit.

bazz26

I like cake.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

The original sentence raises questions about the justice system but the subsequent sentence for murder is nothing to do with political correctness.

I think the reason political correctness seems so prevalent nowadays is because many people don't know what it is and incorrectly use the term.

Ted111

Political Correctness' treatment is coming along nicely.
Showing good signs of improvement and stability.

lawred2

the groutch wrote: »

Sentence is fully justified.
No matter how much of a scumbag someone is, it doesn't give you the right to hunt down and murder them.

I wouldn't say that

How can a predator abuse a tiny child from the age of four to eight, and only serve 27 months?

Father deserved to be convicted though, although the sentence seems very harsh given the background. I see no evidence of political correctness anywhere there.

Ted111

I'd say the father is content to serve 40 years.
I think he would be content to do 400 or 4000, once it meant
he avenged his daughter.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Pure speculation but it's possible he didn't know where this guy was between the time he got out of jail and the time he killed him. Could have gotten word he was in town and headed straight there.

His actions were wrong and he has to go to jail, but that man didn't even serve a year in jail for every year he was actively molesting a very young child, not to mention the life sentence she's serving. I don't condone what he did but I get it, it raises serious questions about sentencing.

Also the thread title could be changed to 'flippy flop gone boopy doop' and it'd have just as much relevance to the OP

My name is URL

sentenced to 40 years in jail after pleading guilty to save her from testifying

How does that even make sense? She's out doing media interviews but testifying would have been too much?

The guy pleaded guilty to murder. How the fcuk is a judge supposed to treat it as anything but murder?

Not everything you happen to disagree with is a sign of 'PC gone mad', ffs

the groutch

Candie wrote: »

How can a predator abuse a tiny child from the age of four to eight, and only serve 27 months?

Father deserved to be convicted though, although the sentence seems very harsh given the background. I see no evidence of political correctness anywhere there.

I'm guessing it was 8-10 years, reduced for a guilty plea, and early release for "good behaviour".

And the first degree murder likely has a manditory sentence.

Old Bill

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

How in the name of muppetry is that an example of 'Political Correctness'?

100 years ago before we had a Politically Correct "Justice" system the father would never have even been put on trial.

It just shows how Politically Correct we have become when a father is put in jail for putting down a child sex beast.

You couldn't make it up.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Ted111 wrote: »

I'd say the father is content to serve 40 years.
I think he would be content to do 400 or 4000, once it meant
he avenged his daughter.

Nah.

Surely the best thing for his daughter would be not putting her through the ordeal of her father being sent to jail.

You can't change the past so I don't really see what good killing someone ten years later achieves.

Pat Mustard

Old Bill wrote: »

100 years ago before we had a Politically Correct "Justice" system the father would never have even been put on trial.

It just shows how Politically Correct we have become when a father is put in jail for putting down a child sex beast.

You couldn't make it up.

He'd have been hanged 100 years ago.

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

How does that even make sense? She's out doing media interviews but testifying would have been too much?

The guy pleaded guilty to murder. How the fcuk is a judge supposed to treat it as anything but murder?

Not everything you happen to disagree with is a sign of 'PC gone mad', ffs

Yeah...the whole "saving her from testifying" angle is a bit strange and doesn't seem to add up.

SEPT 23 1989

I don't think I could hold back if anyone did that to my child

Open prison serve three years max over here

eviltwin

Old Bill wrote: »

100 years ago before we had a Politically Correct "Justice" system the father would never have even been put on trial.

It just shows how Politically Correct we have become when a father is put in jail for putting down a child sex beast.

You couldn't make it up.

You can't go around killing people who hurt your child just because you feel like it

Pat Mustard

Pat Mustard wrote: »

He'd have been hanged 100 years ago.

One hundred years ago the child molester would have been hanged/lynched and the father wouldn't have broken the law!

My name is URL

Old Bill wrote: »

100 years ago before we had a Politically Correct "Justice" system the father would never have even been put on trial.

It just shows how Politically Correct we have become when a father is put in jail for putting down a child sex beast.

You couldn't make it up.

What planet are you on?

100 years ago states didn't give a fcuk about kids. Read a history book

Here in Ireland kids were regularly sentenced to live in borstals etc where they were abused, and where judges knew they were being abused. Police used to arrest kids for trying to escape the abuse, and return them to it.

You're in fantasy land if you think things would have been better in any way 100 years ago!

the groutch

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah...the whole "saving her from testifying" angle is a bit strange and doesn't seem to add up.

I think the "save her from testifying" is referring to the original sex abuse case, which is understandable as she would have been ten years old at the time.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Nah.

Surely the best thing for his daughter would be not putting her through the grief of burying her father.

You can't change the past so I don't really see what good killing someone ten years later achieves.

You're confusing whose daughter it was.

Pat Mustard

[Deleted User] wrote: »

One hundred years ago the child molester would have been hanged/lynched and the father wouldn't have broken the law!

Quite possibly but scumbags have rights these days, dontcha know.

Although I still wouldn't equate a scummer's rights not to be murdered with political correctness!

Jawgap

Old Bill wrote: »

100 years ago before we had a Politically Correct "Justice" system the father would never have even been put on trial.

It just shows how Politically Correct we have become when a father is put in jail for putting down a child sex beast.

You couldn't make it up.

100 years ago we had institutionalised child labour and institutionalised child abuse.....so I'll take our 'politically correct' justice system over what prevailed 100 years go when it would have been likely that the abuser would have never have been caught and the father would've have been hanged.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

the groutch wrote: »

I think the "save her from testifying" is referring to the original sex abuse case, which is understandable as she would have been ten years old at the time.

If he pled not guilty she might have been questioned about the original abuse. If she'd already had to do that as a child that's potentially a hugely traumatic prospect for her, particularly if there was a likelihood of being cross examined.

It's also possible that it was just a good angle for him and he's got his mind on appealing the sentence, if that's even something he can do?

the groutch

the groutch wrote: »

I'm guessing it was 8-10 years, reduced for a guilty plea, and early release for "good behaviour".

And the first degree murder likely has a manditory sentence.

Not nearly enough though, not even close.

I know it's probably mandatory, but it seems harsh not to take the exceptional circumstances into account. It's not quite the same as murdering your granny for an inheritance or offing a bank guard in the commission of a robbery.

There's no winners here, certainly not on the altar of political correctness the OP is all bothered about.

super_furry

Old Bill wrote: »

You couldn't make it up.

Ahh you could. Have you seen Avatar? Mad film, loads of big blue lads who live in space fighting people trying to kill their tree. Mad stuff altogether.

They can make anything up these days, I think the computers help.

Grayson

Pat Mustard wrote: »

Quite possibly but scumbags have rights these days, dontcha know.

Although I still wouldn't equate a scummer's rights not to be murdered with political correctness!

A hundred years ago the guy probably would have gone to a brothel in Alabama where he would have found young girls.

And if he molested someone outside of a brothel he wouldn't have been hanged. They didn't take as dim a view of sex crimes back then. Unless you were black. Until about 1900 rape was defined as that taking of the virginity of a white woman. The main harm was viewed as the damage to a girls reputation. So crimes that were not known till they were reported were not considered as bad.

So, errrr. yeah. Those were the good old days?




As a side note: I'm having trouble understanding the story. The guy who was killed was her step grand father? And her mother found out when she was 21, 5 years after the victim was born? And then there's this bit.

On the way to Brooks' home, Maynor also fired his gun into a convenience store when he spotted a man who had been dating his stepdaughter and allegedly abused her.
The man was able to hide and was unharmed. Ms Maynor's father was sentenced to 20 years for attempted murder in that particular shooting.

So he shot at someone else too? And is that 20 years included in the original sentance?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Grayson wrote: »

A hundred years ago the guy probably would have gone to a brothel in Alabama where he would have found young girls.

And if he molested someone outside of a brothel he wouldn't have been hanged. They didn't take as dim a view of sex crimes back then. Unless you were black.
As a side note: I'm having trouble understanding the story. The guy who was killed was her step grand father? And her mother found out when she was 21, 5 years after the victim was born? And then there's this bit.



So he shot at someone else too? And is that 20 years included in the original sentance?

Abuser was married to victim's grandmother. Victim's mother believed he was her (victim's mother) biological father until she was 21, at which stage victim was 5.

Victim's father then killed his ex-step-father-in-law, who was 16 years his senior. Whole situation completely rehabilitates Alabama's image...

I'd imagine the sentences are concurrent.

Edit: deleted the relevant paragraph from your post and kept the other one, sorry. Tired.

darkpagandeath

And some complained about Anti water charge protesters rocking a car....

Dr Jakub

the groutch wrote: »

Sentence is fully justified.
No matter how much of a scumbag someone is, it doesn't give you the right to hunt down and murder them.

Except it when it comes to child molesters. Hang them ****ers.

wakka12

Going to jail for murder is not political correctness gone mad, you cant just deliberately kill somebody and have nothing happen to you, no matter what the circumstances. These are exceptional circumstances though so I would say he deserves a reduced murder sentence

Pat Mustard

Grayson wrote: »

A hundred years ago the guy probably would have gone to a brothel in Alabama where he would have found young girls.

And if he molested someone outside of a brothel he wouldn't have been hanged. They didn't take as dim a view of sex crimes back then. Unless you were black. Until about 1900 rape was defined as that taking of the virginity of a white woman. The main harm was viewed as the damage to a girls reputation. So crimes that were not known till they were reported were not considered as bad.

So, errrr. yeah. Those were the good old days?

First, what I said was that the father who committed the murder would have been hanged. You are talking about the sex offender.

Secondly, you ask about 'the good old days', as if it's something I suggested in some way. It isn't.

AtomicHorror

Often the "PC gone mad" cliche gets rolled out when the subject is trying to use flattering framing and careful language to downplay something that the accuser considers to be indefensible.

I realise that has nothing to do with the OP's post.

Realt Dearg Sec

I think "it's political correctness gone mad" is just the thing right wing people say now when they hear something they don't like. It's their version of "I'm triggered". Well, except that they really say it...

shedweller

the groutch wrote: »

Sentence is fully justified.
No matter how much of a scumbag someone is, it doesn't give you the right to hunt down and murder them.

I dont know about you but if my child was raped i think i might need to use superhuman strength to not completely destroy the rapist. I might just eat the bastard alive.
And **** the consequences, do-gooders and anyone that had hurt feelings that i murdered someone.

Old Bill

shedweller wrote: »

I dont know about you but if my child was raped i think i might need to use superhuman strength to not completely destroy the rapist. I might just eat the bastard alive.
And **** the consequences, do-gooders and anyone that had hurt feelings that i murdered someone.

The PC brigade and the human rights mob would view you as the criminal if you dispensed Justice.

Our system is so corrupt that they even give free legal aid to convicted sex beasts.

Widdershins

Grayson wrote: »

Until about 1900 rape was defined as that taking of the virginity of a white woman. The main harm was viewed as the damage to a girls reputation.

Yes, it deprived her of the chance to marry in future.

Edups

If some fúcking animal raped my daughter for 4 year got 2 year in prison I tell you what I'd kill the bastard twice if I could. How anyone could get sexual pleasure out of touching what was barely gone past a toddler to start with is beyond comprehension. I can only hope the dirty **** suffered and he wasn't ended quickly. And the people saying no need for it? Are you joking? If that animal did that to your baby your child, your cough would be lively softened.

****ing dirty animal there's few words to describe these sick perverted animals. I can only hope Big Joe had a good 2 year with him during his sentence. I also hope if Big Joe is dead he's making up for the last 10 year wherever he is. Animal.

DukeOfTheSharp

Cool motive, still murder though.

Oodoov

GLaDOS wrote: »

I blame Donald Trump.

And Brexit.

Surely this is all SF's fault?

Peregrinus

Old Bill wrote: »

It's a disgrace that a father gets 40 years in jail simply for trying to protect his daughter against a sex beast. He did what any good father should do.

The law in America just like Ireland has got far too Political Correct and now sides with sex beasts and turns victims into criminals.

Are you under the impression that there was ever a time when it was lawful to murder somebody because, more than a decade previously, he had assaulted a family member of yours?

'Cause, you know, that's not correct. It was never lawful. What you describe as "political correctness gone made" the rest of the world knows as "fundamental legal rules that have been in force for centuries".

Did you know that if you make a contract with somebody and then refue to honour it, he can sue you? It's political correctness gone mad, I tell ya!

Irish Guitarist

I like to keep the medal I got for killing a rapist right next to my darts trophies.

super_furry

Old Bill wrote: »

The PC brigade and the human rights mob would view you as the criminal if you dispensed Justice.

Man, I bet you watch a lot of Clint Eastwood films.

ohnonotgmail

super_furry wrote: »

Man, I bet you watch a lot of Clint Eastwood films.

ah here now. i watch a lot of Clint Eastwood films and i dont think i have ever used the phrase "dispensed justice". It helps that i know the difference between fantasy and reality

fizzypish

bazz26 wrote: »

I like cake.

The cake is a lie