I would do the same...as would any parent

[Hoosier9]

It also apparently reduces some members to such emotional wrecks that they become incapable of logically disassociating their need for personal revenge with the unjustifiable suspension of rule of law.

Don't confuse your idea of revenge to someone else's idea of justice.

Personally, I support the dad, and would NOT vote to convict him in a court of law. Our criminal justice system is flawed, and its doublespeak, loopholes and lack of fortitude in delivering true justice sometimes strip away its moral authority, despite its "legal" authority. If a man kills a child and eats the flesh of the child, just so he could "see what it's like to kill someone," it is an abomination that he EVER be set free to live in society.

Demanding respect for the law, just because it is the law, denies the nature of humanity. The laws must first respect men.

Jury nullification exists for a reason.

 

[rjstew317]

Anybody seen the movie Law Abiding Citizen?

good flick

 

[Bunnykid68]

The Lord said vengeance is his, I just would want to make sure the scumbag got there real quick to be judged

 

[CVMA544]

He shouldn't be saying anything, he should just be planning. He'd never get convicted by any jury I was on.

As a Father of 2, a Grandfather of 4, (soon to be 7 with steps) I can honestly say I am mature and sensible, and I agree with Dross.

To sum it up simply I think a weather front of Pink Mist would be blowing in.

 

[level.eleven]

I'm not sure how this has anything to do with the rule of law.

There are higher moral obligations than to follow the law. I think some of us think this situation applies.

Perhaps they see no moral standing in revenge. Particularly murder being used as revenge - at least I think I understand the rules of the most popular religion in the United States. People tell me everyday its what the nation was "founded upon" so who really knows...

 

[rjstew317]

"God" forgives, my Smith & Wesson doesn't!

 

[dross]

Perhaps they see no moral standing in revenge. Particularly murder being used as revenge - at least I think I understand the rules of the most popular religion in the United States. People tell me everyday its what the nation was "founded upon" so who really knows...

You quote my post, but your point doesn't seem to have anything to do with it. I was explaining to someone who characterized mine and others position as "emotional," and against the rule of law.

As to revenge, that's your characterization. Another word might be "retribution." As to your referencing Christianity, I would never use its philosophy to justify or condemn anything.

 

[Hoosier9]

Perhaps they see no moral standing in revenge. Particularly murder being used as revenge - at least I think I understand the rules of the most popular religion in the United States. People tell me everyday its what the nation was "founded upon" so who really knows...

As far as I'm concerned, putting down an animal who killed my son and ate his flesh, then bragged that he did it just to see what killing a person would feel like, would not be murder. In fact, I would feel worse about putting down a rabid dog.

Revenge? Nah. Just the justice that our derelict criminal justice system failed to ensure.

Lex talionis.

 

[level.eleven]

As far as I'm concerned, putting down an animal who killed my son and ate his flesh, then bragged that he did it just to see what killing a person would feel like, would not be murder. In fact, I would feel worse about putting down a rabid dog.

Revenge? Nah. Just the justice that our derelict criminal justice system failed to ensure.

Lex talionis.

Killing him won't change the system. You can't vote from jail. You can't be an advocate from a cell. The law letting him out has been on the books for 50+ years and was originally drafted in the mid 1800's.

 

[level.eleven]

You quote my post, but your point doesn't seem to have anything to do with it. I was explaining to someone who characterized mine and others position as "emotional," and against the rule of law.

As to revenge, that's your characterization. Another word might be "retribution." As to your referencing Christianity, I would never use its philosophy to justify or condemn anything.

"Retribution" murder isn't based on emotion? Seems to me that emotion is the only motive. I mean, I guess you could take his wallet as well.

 

[right winger]

He shouldn't be saying anything, he should just be planning. He'd never get convicted by any jury I was on.

YEP!

 

[Hoosier9]

Killing him won't change the system. You can't vote from jail. You can't be an advocate from a cell. The law letting him out has been on the books for 50+ years and was originally drafted in the mid 1800's.

The goal is not to change the system. The goal is to render justice, and remove a threat from society. He killed a child and ate his flesh, then bragged about it. Do you really think he will not do it again?

Changing the law now will not render justice in this case. Sometimes, extraordinary measures are needed. I'm not saying that this type of thing should be rampant. I am saying that, in some cases, I understand and support it.

If the law was perfect, jury nullification wouldn't exist. But it does, and for good reason.

 

[level.eleven]

If the law was perfect, jury nullification wouldn't exist. But it does, and for good reason.

And the rhetoric in this thread is nothing but strong ammunition for its opponents.

 

[Bunnykid68]

someone just needs to go to that prison with a few cartons of cigarettes.........

 

[Hoosier9]

And the rhetoric in this thread is nothing but strong ammunition for its opponents.

The jury system REQUIRES that nullification is a part of it. I'm not sure I've ever heard of "opponents" of jury nullification....is there such an organized movement? Opponents of jury nullification are opponents of the entire jury system, period. Each man or woman in a jury must be able to vote his or her conscience, regardless of the law. Otherwise, "of the people, by the people and for the people" means nothing.

 

[Bunnykid68]

The jury system REQUIRES that nullification is a part of it. I'm not sure I've ever heard of "opponents" of jury nullification....is there such an organized movement? Opponents of jury nullification are opponents of the entire jury system, period. Each man or woman in a jury must be able to vote his or her conscience, regardless of the law. Otherwise, "of the people, by the people and for the people" means nothing.

Read this concerning nullification

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo..._jury_nullification_advocate_is_indicted.html

 

[long coat]

The father is doing just what he should be doing. Tell any and all he will kill the man.
Then when he turns up dead, the father will be looked at, but because he was in a room full of people, on video he will be in the clear. And he can even be "mad" because someone else did the job before he could.,

 

[level.eleven]

The jury system REQUIRES that nullification is a part of it. I'm not sure I've ever heard of "opponents" of jury nullification....is there such an organized movement? Opponents of jury nullification are opponents of the entire jury system, period. Each man or woman in a jury must be able to vote his or her conscience, regardless of the law. Otherwise, "of the people, by the people and for the people" means nothing.

There are certainly two sides to the jury nullification argument. Jury nullification is neither pro or anti-tyranny. It's tyranny neutral. Many critics would point to a case like this as a negative use of nullification.

 

[Hoosier9]

There are certainly two sides to the jury nullification argument. Jury nullification is neither pro or anti-tyranny. It's tyranny neutral. Many critics would point to a case like this as a negative use of nullification.

I can certainly see your point of view, as I realize that not everyone has the same morals or views on what constitutes justice. I simply have a different perspective than you. I believe that "an eye for eye" is appropriate, more often than not. If the justice system was more equitable, there would be far less calls for extra-judicial action to ensure justice. It is abhorrent that a man who did what this child killer did will ever see the light of day again.

 

[moea222]

This man will feel no freedom, unless he forgives from the heart ... very hard to do in practice ... but none-the-less necessary if he wants to be "free".