GirlChat #503336
Well, Hen-Wen
Posted by stahntii on 2010-June-03 07:20:33 EDT, Thursday
In reply to Permanent harm is equal to emotional upset? posted by Hen-Wen on 2010-June-03 02:38:35 EDT, Thursday
We'll all just take justice into our own hands whenever we *think* someone's wronged us.
Me:
Remember what I said - "Providing molestation did infact occur, and did infact upset the child in question" - Keyword is: "Providing"
So as long as the Dad was sure of what happened; then delivering the beating he delivered was understandable. And it seems to me a merciful act on behalf of the judge for deciding all punishments were already paid, and that no one had to go to prison.
Why aren't you addressing the extreme injustices that are perpetrated on peds in prison? This molestor was spared that by the judge. And the man who delivered the beaten was also spared prison. Sounds like as good an example of justice as any, to me. Now, sure, if more beatings or molestations were to be perpetrated by any of these same people, then new investigations should take place. But for the judge in this case to call "justice served and no prison or criminal records for any a ya's", sounds pretty damn reasonable and merciful. And I think this is a decent example of punishment fitting the crime, and also where the government didn't HAVE to be the administerer of some punishment. It really is cool that this Aussie Court was not hell-bent (like Court's in the U.S. always seem to be) on stealing an opportunity to administer some punishment itself.
But in the U. S. of fuckin A., FORGET ABOUT THAT. U.S. district attorney's can, and usually do, go to great lengths to make for themselves an opportunity to administer it's own form of punishment onto defendants, in complete ignorance of the fact that, like in this Aussie case, justice may already be served. For example, district attorney's in the U.S. often override, a "victims'" right to withdraw charges against a defendant, at which time they (the D.A.) pursue the charges themselves. I believe these district attorney's do this, simply to play "The Big Bullying Boss" (a way for them to spread fear of state power).
So what this Aussie court did (if the news article is true, and the court did infact make such a decision) is honorable, merciful and practical, in my opinion.
This post is archived, preventing any new replies.
Responses
- Begging the question. - Hen-Wen on 2010-June-03 11:13:31 EDT, Thursday - (0 / 0 / 0)