Teen Confesses To Molesting Sister, Dad Executes Him

[Caitlin.ann]

A 15-year-old boy who was killed by his father in an execution style killing spent the last moments of his life pleading, "No, Daddy! No!"

Jamar Pinkney Jr. was shot in the head Monday by his 37-year-old father, Jamar Pinkney Sr., who allegedly made the teen strip his clothes off and kneel in a vacant lot before he was killed by a single bullet.

The boy's mother, Lazette Cherry, told the Detroit Free Press that Pinkney Sr., showed up at her Highland Park, Mich., home after she told him that their son had made a startling confession.

According to Cherry, the 15-year-old had admitted to having "inappropriate contact" with his 3-year-old half sister.


Link (http://abcnews.go.com/WN/father-kills-son-molesting-sister/story?id=9127703)

Obviously the teen had an issue and was pleading for help..and then his father murders him..I hope this son of a bitch gets the worst he can. :(

[Nicholas]

Link (http://abcnews.go.com/WN/father-kills-son-molesting-sister/story?id=9127703)

Obviously the teen had an issue and was pleading for help..and then his father murders him..I hope this son of a bitch gets the worst he can. :(


Sorry hun, I don't feel one bit sorry for him.

[Caitlin.ann]

I do. A 15 year old doesn't molest a 3 year old unless they have issues. I assume he told his mother in a sort of plea for help. However CNN or HLN..forget has said that the mother took the 3 year old to the hospital and there was no trauma so it may not have occurred.

Then the father forces the 15 year old to strip in a vacant lot and shoots him execution style..its beyond horrible.

[Nox_Mortus]

The story that I read said that the kid didn't confess and that doctors found no signs of sexual abuse, but that he was accused by someone. In any case, that's pretty sickening.

[Caitlin.ann]

The story that I read said that the kid didn't confess and that doctors found no signs of sexual abuse, but that he was accused by someone. In any case, that's pretty sickening.

I hadn't heard that he was accused, but this is exactly why this stuff is meant to go through the justice system. Wonder if the father was looking for a reason to get rid of this young man.

[Laisrean]

I do. A 15 year old doesn't molest a 3 year old unless they have issues.

No one of any age molests a 3-year-old unless they have issues. Why does it matter if he's 15, 20, or 50? No age gives you the right to molest kids. I understand why the father did what he did. It was by no means the right thing to do, but we all feel that way about pedophiles from time to time... most don't act on it, but we do have those feelings of anger over the rape of innocent children.

[Caitlin.ann]

No one of any age molests a 3-year-old unless they have issues. Why does it matter if he's 15, 20, or 50? No age gives you the right to molest kids. I understand why the father did what he did. It was by no means the right thing to do, but we all feel that way about pedophiles from time to time... most don't act on it, but we do have those feelings of anger over the rape of innocent children.

There was no trauma or proof she was molested.

[CheshireEyes]

Link (http://abcnews.go.com/WN/father-kills-son-molesting-sister/story?id=9127703)

Obviously the teen had an issue and was pleading for help..and then his father murders him..I hope this son of a bitch gets the worst he can. :(

Well, I think the son of a bitch did, his father killed him... :thumbsup:

[CheshireEyes]

I hadn't heard that he was accused, but this is exactly why this stuff is meant to go through the justice system. Wonder if the father was looking for a reason to get rid of this young man.

Yeah, so low and behold, the kid cops to molesting his sister, what luck on the father's part that he had a reason now... *rolls eyes*

[Gwenhwyfar]

It said the boy made a confession to his mother - what other proof do you want? If I found out someone molested my kid - I very well may kill or torture that person...but when the molestation is from my other kid...god what a horrible thing to deal with.
I was molested when I was 12, and I know for a fact that if I had of told my parents about it, my dad would have loaded up his shotgun and killed the man. I can't imagine what the parents of both kids are going through..cant even imagine.

[SilverClaw]

It said the boy made a confession to his mother - what other proof do you want? People have been known to lie about the confessions they make. It is not something unheard of .



Then the father forces the 15 year old to strip in a vacant lot and shoots him execution style..its beyond horrible. Ya that is horrible and it makes me wonder if the boys supposed issues stems from his father.

[Nox_Mortus]

It said the boy made a confession to his mother - what other proof do you want?

how about forensic evidence? you know the stuff they usually need to solve these cases the right way?

[CheshireEyes]

Street justice. Saved the tax payers plenty. And they'll prolly plea bargain the dad.

[♀♥Lady Urania♥♀]

Two wrongs dont make a right.

[Nox_Mortus]

Street justice. Saved the tax payers plenty. And they'll prolly plea bargain the dad.

Where's the justice in killing someone over completely unproven allegations?

[CheshireEyes]

how about forensic evidence? you know the stuff they usually need to solve these cases the right way?

as for evidence, it may not be there depending on when its done, the hymen could've been broken thru some accident that wouldn't naturally be as a result of molestation.

[CheshireEyes]

Where's the justice in killing someone over completely unproven allegations?

ummm, don't know if you know this but the justice system DOES take confessions....they have these things called interview rooms where it happens quite often...

[Nox_Mortus]

as for evidence, it may not be there depending on when its done, the hymen could've been broken thru some accident that wouldn't naturally be as a result of molestation.

maybe, but there's still no evidence, which makes the allegations completely unproven, false confessions happen all the time under all sorts of circumstances.

ummm, don't know if you know this but the justice system DOES take confessions....they have these things called interview rooms where it happens quite often...
and they rarely hold up without backing evidence or testimony, of which there is none.

[CheshireEyes]

Two wrongs dont make a right.

two negatives equal a positive, two odds make an even....YAY for math!!! :hahugh:

[CheshireEyes]

maybe, but there's still no evidence, which makes the allegations completely unproven, false confessions happen all the time under all sorts of circumstances.

yeah, now we don't have to worry bout anyone saying it got beat of him by the cops...

[TuathaSidhe]

According so some of the things ive seen on this. He didnt confess, he told his mother he behaved inappropriately with his 3 year old half sister but insisted he didnt molest her. Evidence shows that.

The mother called his father the morning and told him and said that they were going to get him help (im assuming her and the boys stepfather) and the father of the boy showed up that afternoon with a gun, pistol whipped the boy, made him strip naked and took him outside, shooting him in the head while he was on his knees begging his dad to stop.

The girl was unharmed, but most peoples hearing will go away after there is a hint of it possibly happening, even when evidence says otherwise.

Im not excusing what the boy did, but the father should not have done this, at all. He had plenty of time to cool his heels and think straight.

Knee jerk reactions are why people dont seek help with things like this.

[Nox_Mortus]

yeah, now we don't have to worry bout anyone saying it got beat of him by the cops...

wow, that attitude is absolutely disgusting, it's clear that you don't really care about justice or whether or not this kid even did anything, I'm done here.

[CheshireEyes]

wow, that attitude is absolutely disgusting, it's clear that you don't really care about justice or whether or not this kid even did anything, I'm done here.

its clear you really dont understand the justice system.

[♀♥Lady Urania♥♀]

two negatives equal a positive, two odds make an even....YAY for math!!! :hahugh:

Yes but two wrongs still dont make a right :)

[Nox_Mortus]

its clear you really dont understand the justice system.

actually as someone who's been through it more than once, I would say I have a pretty good understanding of it, and as someone who studies psychology I have a pretty clear understanding of why confessions are generally worthless for this sort of thing.

[TuathaSidhe]

Unless the kid confessed to the cops, it doesnt matter what he said to his mom. Some places say he confessed, some say he didnt.

Fact is there isnt any evidence.

[Nox_Mortus]

Unless the kid confessed to the cops, it doesnt matter what he said to his mom. Some places say he confessed, some say he didnt.

Fact is there isnt any evidence.

Yep, and his confession to his mother wouldn't even be allowed in any court.

[CheshireEyes]

actually as someone who's been through it more than once, I would say I have a pretty good understanding of it, and as someone who studies psychology I have a pretty clear understanding of why confessions are generally worthless for this sort of thing.

Wait. Didn't you just say you were done here? :hahugh:

Oh, studies psychology, well, I didn't know, what was I thinking. I read a book once on unicorns too, so does that make me an expert?

I saw a movie, The Client, so I also apparently am well versed in the justice system as well.

[Nox_Mortus]

Wait. Didn't you just say you were done here? :hahugh:

Oh, studies psychology, well, I didn't know, what was I thinking. I read a book once on unicorns too, so does that make me an expert?

I saw a movie, The Client, so I also apparently am well versed in the justice system as well.

Ahh yes, the appeal to ridicule argument, that's clever. Do have anything constructive to add, like for example an explination of why it's ok to execute someone with absolutely zero evidence that they did anything wrong?

[CheshireEyes]

Yep, and his confession to his mother wouldn't even be allowed in any court.

Oh, and why is that? You're not referring to something similar to spousal privilege are you? Or are you referring to the kid's age?

In the first, that refers to a spouse not being allowed to bear damaging testimony against a spouse because of marital privilege. Depending on the state's laws and how young a child can be to be considered an adult, that too, would be admissible.

[CheshireEyes]

Ahh yes, the appeal to ridicule argument, that's clever. Do have anything constructive to add, like for example an explination of why it's ok to execute someone with absolutely zero evidence that they did anything wrong?

War.

[Nox_Mortus]

War.

No that's still unacceptable, but another topic altogether.

To clarify, why do you think it was justified that this guy killed his son when he had absolutely zero evidence that he did anything wrong?

[BryonMorrigan]

maybe, but there's still no evidence, which makes the allegations completely unproven, false confessions happen all the time under all sorts of circumstances.

and they rarely hold up without backing evidence or testimony, of which there is none.

I am certified in law enforcement interview and interrogation. (It helped when I was a PI.)

In the class you watch video of subjects being interrogated until they lie and cop to something that they didn't do. The object of interrogation is to get to the truth, but people lie all the time about being guilty.

:::tries to cough and say "West Memphis 3" at the same time:::

I watched one interrogation where the detective had forced a teen into interrogation and he went into all kinds of detail about this murder...only when they examined the evidence, they found out that someone else had done it. IOW, he even made up a story for the detective.

A 15 year old boy is a "juvenile" for a reason...and we don't interrogate juveniles any more without their parents present because of how easily they can be led into lying. Often, kids with "issues" lie to their parents for attention.

Anyways, back on subject...I have very little sympathy for sexual predators...but I don't understand the mentality of the father. Even if one of my kids turned into a zombie and "ate" another one...I'd have difficulty pulling the trigger. I certainly don't think I could make her kneel down and then shoot her in the head. Jeez.

[And now Bryon gets all "Criminal Minds" on your butts....]

I think, from a psychological perspective, that the disconnect between the father and the son shows that, to me...the father was not acting out of "love" for his daughter, but rather due to the idea that he felt his "property" (the daughter) had been violated. Many in this 21st Century society still look at any kind of sexual activity pre-marriage to somehow "ruin" a girl, and I wonder if that was the actual source of the father's rage...since I just can't accept the idea that a man who calmly shoots his kid in the back of the head is not suffering from Anti-Social Personality Disorder or Schizophrenia of some kind. This sounds like a variety of "honor killing" to me.

[CheshireEyes]

No that's still unacceptable, but another topic altogether.
you asked for another example, I gave you one.




To clarify, why do you think it was justified that this guy killed his son when he had absolutely zero evidence that he did anything wrong?




CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - Circumstantial evidence is best explained by saying what it is not - it is not direct evidence from a witness who saw or heard something. Circumstantial evidence is a fact that can be used to infer another fact.
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/c342.htm






DEFINITION

A confession is the name given to an admission made by a defendant in criminal proceedings.

Under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) section 82, a confession is defined as;

“any statement wholly or partly adverse to the person who made it, whether made to a person in authority or not, and whether made in words or otherwise”.

THE GENERAL RULE OF ADMISSIBILITY

The general rule is that a confession is admissible evidence against the person who made it, despite the confession being technically hearsay (s.76(1) PACE).

http://www.forensicmed.co.uk/confessions.htm



wow, that Client movie really helped me here.... :hahugh::thumbsup:

[Nox_Mortus]

that confession was not made to police, and is therefore hearsay and is therefore not evidence. It could be considered evidence if the the kid was dead or something (which he is now) but at the time he was not so no he was acting with zero evidence. Apparently the HEarsay rule never comes up in the Client....

[CheshireEyes]

that confession was not made to police, and is therefore hearsay and is therefore not evidence. It could be considered evidence if the the kid was dead or something (which he is now) but at the time he was not so no he was acting with zero evidence. Apparently the HEarsay rule never comes up in the Client....

Oh, it came in handy because it was about the court system and I studied it while watching the movie.

[Nox_Mortus]

Oh, it came in handy because it was about the court system and I studied it while watching the movie.

riiight, and I'm the one who doesn't know how the legal system works....

[CheshireEyes]

riiight, and I'm the one who doesn't know how the legal system works....


Ahh yes, the appeal to ridicule argument, that's clever. Do have anything constructive to add, like for example an explination of why it's ok to execute someone with absolutely zero evidence that they did anything wrong?

And its spelled "explanation"....just saying.... knowing how you study all that psychology, figured they'd have that in those books.... :smile:

[Nox_Mortus]

And its spelled "explanation"....just saying.... knowing how you study all that psychology, figured they'd have that in those books.... :smile:

wow that's a great argument, when you can't think of anything relevant you just go on about minor typing errors in completely unrelated posts, wow you certainly are smart aren't you?

[♀♥Lady Urania♥♀]

Well one thing is certain - no matter how you slice it - there is evidence a murder was committed. Doesnt take a police officer or attorney to tell you that one.

[Raxeph]

Hm, there seems to be insufficient evidence to ascertain the boy's guilt or innocence here. It should have been handled much better than it was, because it is distinctly muddy.


A 15 year old boy is a "juvenile" for a reason...and we don't interrogate juveniles any more without their parents present because of how easily they can be led into lying. Often, kids with "issues" lie to their parents for attention.

Quite. :)

[swapmeetmomma]

He confessed to his mother. I doubt his mom intimidated him into confessing something like that. Like a cop might do in an interrogation room. And he said he was acting inappropriately, he didnt say he raped her. So maybe there is nothing there to find as far as evidence.

[Wood Nymph]

Yep, and his confession to his mother wouldn't even be allowed in any court.

In the USA (if that is where this happened, I did not read the article) the evidence of a statement against self interest (confession) to another person is admissible in court. There is no privileged communication between son and mother, meaning that there is no exception which would keep out such a confession.

A confession is one of the many, many, many exceptions to the rule against hearsay evidence under the common law which was adopted in the USA.

[Caitlin.ann]

I'm usually one of the first people on this site who screams for harsh criminal punishment for child molesters, rapists and murderers. However in this situation there was insufficient evidence to punish the boy and two wrongs do not make a right. There is no excuse for vigilante justice. Making a 15 year old boy strip naked and shoot him execution style on a vacant lot as he pleads for his life is beyond the line..this father needs to be punished in the severest way possible.

[TuathaSidhe]

im usually right there with you, but this took thought.

I could understand more if he was right there when the mother told him and he went off and killed him in the heat of the moment.

[Nox_Mortus]

A confession is one of the many, many, many exceptions to the rule against hearsay evidence under the common law which was adopted in the USA.

It's only an exception if the person who supposedly confessed is unavailable. It will be admissible at the fathers murder trial, it wouldn't if the kid where being tried though.

[Caitlin.ann]

im usually right there with you, but this took thought.

I could understand more if he was right there when the mother told him and he went off and killed him in the heat of the moment.

Exactly..he had time to think this through..it was methodical and thought out. He shot him execution style..he didn't lose his mind in the heat of the moment and go into a rampage shooting from a distance..he did this at point blank range with the child pleading for his life.

[Phoenix Blue]

wow that's a great argument, when you can't think of anything relevant you just go on about minor typing errors in completely unrelated posts, wow you certainly are smart aren't you?
Nox Mortus, CheshireEyes -- Break it up.

[memnoch]

No one of any age molests a 3-year-old unless they have issues. Why does it matter if he's 15, 20, or 50? No age gives you the right to molest kids. I understand why the father did what he did. It was by no means the right thing to do, but we all feel that way about pedophiles from time to time... most don't act on it, but we do have those feelings of anger over the rape of innocent children.

assuming the teen did molest the 3 year old I agree with this. SS does make a valid point about not knowing whether things went down that way.

[Sequoia]

I'm seeing some pretty f-cked up responses. What the hell?

So... this kid "confesses" to have "acted inappropriately," with absolutely NO EVIDENCE THAT HE MOLESTED HER. Acting "inappropriately" could be anything from undressing her, to staring while changing her diaper, to kissing her "romantically". Inappropriate? Sure. A cry for help? Definitely. Reason to VIOLENTLY KILL HIM???

What the hell is wrong with the people demonstrating this lynch mob attitude?

We don't know what, IF ANYTHING, he did wrong... and now, we never will. Because some vigilante f-cktard decided to kill him. Violently. Humiliatingly.

I hope this murderer goes to prison for life. You don't kill a CHILD who CRIES FOR HELP. Obviously the kid knew something was wrong with himself, whether he did anything or not. He was obviously a troubled CHILD, and now...

Well, I think there's a clear picture of why the boy might've been troubled.

[Infinite Grey]

It seems an accusation or a dubious confession is enough to condemn this boy. Kind of reminds me of the witch trails really.

[Sequoia]

It seems an accusation or a dubious confession is enough to condemn this boy. Kind of reminds me of the witch trails really.

Trials, IG.

And you're right. It has the same sort of hysteria.

Real molesters and abusers can go under the guise of "parent" and "family friend", fly right under the radar. A kid "confesses" to having done something he thought was wrong, and suddenly it's peachy for one man to be judge, jury, and executioner. He didn't even GET a "witch trial." He got no trial at all.

It's disgusting.

[memnoch]

Trials, IG.

And you're right. It has the same sort of hysteria.

Real molesters and abusers can go under the guise of "parent" and "family friend", fly right under the radar. A kid "confesses" to having done something he thought was wrong, and suddenly it's peachy for one man to be judge, jury, and executioner. He didn't even GET a "witch trial." He got no trial at all.

It's disgusting.

Here is the problem I'm having with this. If you want to say that he did it and confessed and he should be forgiven or whatever for his actions, I would have to agree with Lais earlier, that it was a stupid thing for a guy to do, but I understand the sentiment

If you want to say that we don't know that he really did it, or if there was a confession, that too is valid and leaves a reason to believe that maybe he wasn't a perv.

However both can't be true.

[Sequoia]

Here is the problem I'm having with this. If you want to say that he did it and confessed and he should be forgiven or whatever for his actions, I would have to agree with Lais earlier, that it was a stupid thing for a guy to do, but I understand the sentiment

If you want to say that we don't know that he really did it, or if there was a confession, that too is valid and leaves a reason to believe that maybe he wasn't a perv.

However both can't be true.

Look, even if he did "something," and there's no way we'll ever know what (if anything) happened, he's a f-cking kid. Children his age don't DO that sort of thing unless someone's done it to THEM.

If he had hurt her? Yes. He should be "put through the system" for the law to determine what should happen to him. But vigilante killings?

Frankly, my position on this is that we have no idea what he may or may not have done, there is absolutely NO evidence that the little girl was physically harmed, and there IS evidence that the "father" committed cold-blooded murder.

[Caitlin.ann]

Methodical and thought-out murder. He had time to think about it, to cool down. Instead he made his son strip down, get on his knees and shot him at point blank range in the head as he was pleading for his life.

****er must be punished.

[Infinite Grey]

Trials, IG.

You know, that's one of my more prolific typos - my fingers are just not comfortable putting "i"s before "a", even though that's the most common alignment. I'm so glad I have people around here that take the time to point out such a superficial lapse in typing control


And you're right. It has the same sort of hysteria.

Real molesters and abusers can go under the guise of "parent" and "family friend", fly right under the radar. A kid "confesses" to having done something he thought was wrong, and suddenly it's peachy for one man to be judge, jury, and executioner. He didn't even GET a "witch trial." He got no trial at all.

It's disgusting.
Indeedy do.

[Raxeph]

Also, if we assume the son was guilty...

Well, I can imagine many, many people in general would love the thought of the blood of a paedophile or child molestor being spilt. I admit, I am one who likes the thought of it too. We've seen another particularly heinous case this week involving the Mohler family too, in this topic here: http://mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?t=224005

But in this case, this individual case, the boy didn't run away from what he did, like so many sexual predators have, and confessed what he had done. And for that, he was coldly executed whilst he was stripped naked and sobbing. Why did he confess? Was it a cry for help, that he knew what he was doing was wrong, and wanted someone to fix him, to repair him? Did he deserve a bullet for wanting that, instead of remaining silent and plunging into it with further relish and delight, as so many fiends have done so before? I quote:


And you're right. It has the same sort of hysteria.

Real molesters and abusers can go under the guise of "parent" and "family friend", fly right under the radar. A kid "confesses" to having done something he thought was wrong, and suddenly it's peachy for one man to be judge, jury, and executioner. He didn't even GET a "witch trial." He got no trial at all.

It's disgusting.

This is why, despite my hatred of paedophiles and child molesters, I must especially agree with the law in this case, and not vigilantism.

[TuathaSidhe]

Just wondering if anyone has thought that maybe he thought he did something wrong and wasnt sure? Not to be confused with knowing he did something wrong.

Just a thought that popped into my head.

[Sequoia]

Just wondering if anyone has thought that maybe he thought he did something wrong and wasnt sure? Not to be confused with knowing he did something wrong.

Just a thought that popped into my head.

Yeah, I'm thinking along the same lines.

[Raxeph]

Just wondering if anyone has thought that maybe he thought he did something wrong and wasnt sure? Not to be confused with knowing he did something wrong.

Just a thought that popped into my head.

That is true, unfortunately, we'll never know what he meant by it now.

[memnoch]

Look, even if he did "something," and there's no way we'll ever know what (if anything) happened, he's a f-cking kid. Children his age don't DO that sort of thing unless someone's done it to THEM.

If he had hurt her? Yes. He should be "put through the system" for the law to determine what should happen to him. But vigilante killings?

Frankly, my position on this is that we have no idea what he may or may not have done, there is absolutely NO evidence that the little girl was physically harmed, and there IS evidence that the "father" committed cold-blooded murder.

I disagree, age is not an excuse at that point, if he were 8, maybe, and assuming he did do something and confessed, the guilt shows he understood that it was wrong. Again, I'm not saying he should have been killed like that...however IF he came out and admitted to doing something so heinous I am able to understand the fathers actions...not that I agree with them, but I understand them.

I don't think anyone is saying let this guy go, but this guys actions do not negate the actions of the dead son.

[Laisrean]

So... this kid "confesses" to have "acted inappropriately," with absolutely NO EVIDENCE THAT HE MOLESTED HER. Acting "inappropriately" could be anything from undressing her, to staring while changing her diaper, to kissing her "romantically".

Any or all of these could have happened, and that would explain why no trauma was found on the child. So it doesn't mean he didn't do something, it just means he didn't do anything that produced noticeable trauma. I imagine the type of trauma they look for is vaginal tears and things like that... just about anything else a pedophile would do might not leave any evidence behind. So I don't think we can say the boy was innocent just on the basis of there being no trauma.

[Infinite Grey]

I don't think anyone is saying let this guy go, but this guys actions do not negate the actions of the dead son.

Alleged actions - you still believe in innocent until proven guilty right? None of the articles are very clear on what he confessed, or the circumstances of his confession - but if you want to take an Orwellian approach to determining guilt, by all means :thumbsup:

[Infinite Grey]

Any or all of these could have happened, and that would explain why no trauma was found on the child. So it doesn't mean he didn't do something, it just means he didn't do anything that produced noticeable trauma. I imagine the type of trauma they look for is vaginal tears and things like that... just about anything else a pedophile would do might not leave any evidence behind. So I don't think we can say the boy was innocent just on the basis of there being no trauma.

No one has to prove his innocence Lais. Innocent until proven guilty, remember.



Hmmm Lais and Memn's posts both go on the validate my original sentiment - accusation seems to be enough.

[Laisrean]

I disagree, age is not an excuse at that point, if he were 8, maybe, and assuming he did do something and confessed, the guilt shows he understood that it was wrong. Again, I'm not saying he should have been killed like that...however IF he came out and admitted to doing something so heinous I am able to understand the fathers actions...not that I agree with them, but I understand them.

I don't think anyone is saying let this guy go, but this guys actions do not negate the actions of the dead son.

Agreed with everything.

15 year olds are often tried as adults, which I feel is appropriate. In ancient times you were considered an adult at 13. Around that age people become sexually active, and if they have an inclination towards children then this is the time when it would start popping up. So this boys career in pedophilery might just have gotten started.

For all we know, the father might have saved the world from another of those scumbags that have a couple dozen corpses buried under the crawlspace. If that would have ended up being the case, then I'm glad the father killed the boy. We don't know if that would have happened or not, but the father might have saved us from the next John Gacy.

[ignescentphoenix]

The father was wrong to kill him. He should have called the cops. The victim did not have a trial. It is innocent until proven guilty, always. I don't think the father commited this crime while suffering "temporary insanity". He pistol-whipped the boy, took him to a vacant lot, made him strip, and shot him. That is alot of things to do in the heat of the moment.

[aranarose]

Part of me wonders if the father was trying to cover something up by killing the boy.

Pedophilia is a conditioned crime for the most part. Kid gets raped, grows up to be a rapist, turning other kids into rapists, perpetuating the crime generation after generation.

So here we have a 15-year-old who *may* have confessed to *maybe* doing something inappropriate. Who made him that way?

My guess? And this is just a guess... the father. Made him strip and then shot him? Sounds like sexual humiliation to me.

[ShadowcatX]

I do. A 15 year old doesn't molest a 3 year old unless they have issues. I assume he told his mother in a sort of plea for help. However CNN or HLN..forget has said that the mother took the 3 year old to the hospital and there was no trauma so it may not have occurred.

Then the father forces the 15 year old to strip in a vacant lot and shoots him execution style..its beyond horrible.

No one molests a 3 year old unless they have issues. Does that let all of them off the hook?

That said, it isn't the dad's place to be judge, jury, and executioner, especially given the kid's age and that he reached out for help.

[Wolfpoet]

There is a reason civilised societies operate under a rule of law

[Glowy]

Part of me wonders if the father was trying to cover something up by killing the boy.

Pedophilia is a conditioned crime for the most part. Kid gets raped, grows up to be a rapist, turning other kids into rapists, perpetuating the crime generation after generation.

So here we have a 15-year-old who *may* have confessed to *maybe* doing something inappropriate. Who made him that way?

My guess? And this is just a guess... the father. Made him strip and then shot him? Sounds like sexual humiliation to me.

This is how my thoughts were headed. If this teen had possibly been abused sexually, than so much as holding his sister on his lap, or changing a diaper may have been in his mind "innappropriate" I guess more will come out, and we will know the full story?

[TeamTwig]

Agreed with everything.

15 year olds are often tried as adults, which I feel is appropriate. In ancient times you were considered an adult at 13. Around that age people become sexually active, and if they have an inclination towards children then this is the time when it would start popping up. So this boys career in pedophilery might just have gotten started.

For all we know, the father might have saved the world from another of those scumbags that have a couple dozen corpses buried under the crawlspace. If that would have ended up being the case, then I'm glad the father killed the boy. We don't know if that would have happened or not, but the father might have saved us from the next John Gacy.

I can see this side of things, and understand the point being made. However, there are so many grey areas in this story. Nobody knows for sure that any crime actually took place - as others have mentioned already. There are forms of molestation that would leave no physical evidence, but this also could have been a kid who (as others have also mentioned) could have had "impure thoughts" or been confused as to if he had done something wrong or not - when maybe he hadn't.
He obviously spoke up to his mom about it because he was bothered by it. Regardless of what he had or hadn't done, he was clearly looking for help. You can't just go around shooting people because of something they may or may not have done. What if this kid was just a little confused, but completely innocent?

The very fact that this boy's father was able to execute his own child, while he was begging for his life, speaks volumes. That's just terrible.

[Sequoia]

The very fact that this boy's father was able to execute his own child, while he was begging for his life, speaks volumes.

I think the fact that people are condoning this speaks far more.

[Wolfpoet]

I think the fact that people are condoning this speaks far more.

Glad I'm not the only one thinking that.

[Caitlin.ann]

Glad I'm not the only one thinking that.

Oh you all are definitely not the only ones thinking that.

[~*Midnight Flame*~]

I think the fact that people are condoning this speaks far more.
My thoughts exactly...wow.

[Wolfpoet]

So, the world according to mem and lais:

Anyone suspected of being a peadophile should be executed without trial and applauded for the action.

Now I believe it's already been mentioned briefly, but lets examine something here.

The boy was told to strip naked before he was executed, this raises some red flags in my mind.

Also there is something people tend to forget in their haste to lynch peadophiles. many do not even realise what they are doing is wrong or why. One of the saddest realities is abuse is passed down in the family in many cases.

A child grows up being abused and is conditioned into believing that this is normal, as adults they are told it's not and society tells us it is immoral and wrong yet this wars with conditioned, even programmed views from childhood.

I am left wondering, what happened to this boy, what is left unkown and unsaid.

Then again, it seems some people think the rule of law only applies when it suits them, I ahve nothing but contempt for them. One hopes Lais or mem is not wrongfully accused of such a crime and subjected to such 'justice'.

[Cunae]

I am a little hard on pedophiles... I wish all of them were simply executed right off, hopefully by one of their victims but then by a parent if the victim is too young. I have no mercy for these monsters and find no place for them on the planet I call home. Let's not waste a dime on a trial or token jail time. The less time I have to share oxygen with them, the better.

Maybe only victims feel so harshly.

[memnoch]

I think the fact that people are condoning this speaks far more.

I didn't notice much condoning, just an understanding of why one would do this


So, the world according to mem and lais:

Anyone suspected of being a peadophile should be executed without trial and applauded for the action.

Now I believe it's already been mentioned briefly, but lets examine something here.

The boy was told to strip naked before he was executed, this raises some red flags in my mind.

Also there is something people tend to forget in their haste to lynch peadophiles. many do not even realise what they are doing is wrong or why. One of the saddest realities is abuse is passed down in the family in many cases.

A child grows up being abused and is conditioned into believing that this is normal, as adults they are told it's not and society tells us it is immoral and wrong yet this wars with conditioned, even programmed views from childhood.

I am left wondering, what happened to this boy, what is left unkown and unsaid.

Then again, it seems some people think the rule of law only applies when it suits them, I ahve nothing but contempt for them. One hopes Lais or mem is not wrongfully accused of such a crime and subjected to such 'justice'.

please, this is quite possibly the most flimsy strawman ever.

[Laisrean]

So, the world according to mem and lais:

Anyone suspected of being a peadophile should be executed without trial and applauded for the action.

Nah, that's the situation according to you. You are putting words in our mouths. Neither Mem nor I said we approve of the father's actions, we actually said we disapproved.

If you had bothered to read our posts we didn't say we condone the father's actions, but that we understand the motivation. No one loves a pedophile, but that doesn't mean you can take the law into your own hands. What he did wasn't right, but again I understand why he did it.

I shouldn't have had to explain it again, because if you had read my post carefully instead of skimming through and typing some knee-jerk response you would understand that this isn't black and white, but rather a few shades of grey.

[TuathaSidhe]

I am a little hard on pedophiles... I wish all of them were simply executed right off, hopefully by one of their victims but then by a parent if the victim is too young. I have no mercy for these monsters and find no place for them on the planet I call home. Let's not waste a dime on a trial or token jail time. The less time I have to share oxygen with them, the better.

thats all fine and dandy, except we dont know if this kid was or wasnt because now there will never be an investigation or trial or anything. Its pretty blind to just accuse of someone with no real evidence


Maybe only victims feel so harshly.


hardly

[memnoch]

Nah, that's the situation according to you. You are putting words in our mouths. Neither Mem nor I said we approve of the father's actions, we actually said we disapproved.

If you had bothered to read our posts we didn't say we condone the father's actions, but that we understand the motivation. No one loves a pedophile, but that doesn't mean you can take the law into your own hands. What he did wasn't right, but again I understand why he did it.

I shouldn't have had to explain it again, because if you had read my post carefully instead of skimming through and typing some knee-jerk response you would understand that this isn't black and white, but rather a few shades of grey.

don't you know conservatives and libertarians only see things in black and white, everyone else sees every imaginable shade of grey, and many other shades as well

[Cassie]

I am a little hard on pedophiles... I wish all of them were simply executed right off, hopefully by one of their victims but then by a parent if the victim is too young. I have no mercy for these monsters and find no place for them on the planet I call home. Let's not waste a dime on a trial or token jail time. The less time I have to share oxygen with them, the better.

Maybe only victims feel so harshly.
And how do you feel about fathers who force their children to strip naked and then blow their brains out?

The thing is we don't know what crime the 15 year old actually committed in this case and there is a real possibility that he didn't commit any crime at all. All we know for sure is that his father murdered him in cold blood.

I am sure we all hate pedophiles and what they do; but since this teenager was the denied the possibility of legal representation or any form of a trial, we should assume (as the law does) that he was innocent.

[Galen]

I'm struggling with what I find more appalling...the father's actions or the opinions of some of the people here.

[Kraheera]

I am a little hard on pedophiles... I wish all of them were simply executed right off, hopefully by one of their victims but then by a parent if the victim is too young. I have no mercy for these monsters and find no place for them on the planet I call home. Let's not waste a dime on a trial or token jail time. The less time I have to share oxygen with them, the better.

Maybe only victims feel so harshly.


You know, I find blind hatred towards pedophiles to be downright disheartening. Pedophiles aren't all horrid people. Not all of them actually DO anything to children. It is a mental problem, and a lot of pedophiles are just as sickened by the news reports as anyone else.

So to label them all monsters is ridiculous.

We have sociopaths on this very board, but they don't go around slaughtering people. Even if they may have that urge at times.

The fact that this boy, if he was indeed a pedophile, brought up his problem means that he was trying to get help. He was trying NOT to give into urges.

Would you be up for killing all those with mental problems?

[Laisrean]

Not all of them actually DO anything to children. It is a mental problem, and a lot of pedophiles are just as sickened by the news reports as anyone else.

True, but if a pedophile does not act out their fantasies, then there is absolutely no reason that anyone would ever have to know they are pedophiles. Even if I knew someone was a pedophile in their fantasies I would not hate them for it. I only hate those who cross the line between fantasy and reality and end up doing terrible things to innocent children.

[twinkletwinkle]

Part of me wonders if the father was trying to cover something up by killing the boy.

Pedophilia is a conditioned crime for the most part. Kid gets raped, grows up to be a rapist, turning other kids into rapists, perpetuating the crime generation after generation.

So here we have a 15-year-old who *may* have confessed to *maybe* doing something inappropriate. Who made him that way?

My guess? And this is just a guess... the father. Made him strip and then shot him? Sounds like sexual humiliation to me.

That's what I was thinking as well.

[memnoch]

True, but if a pedophile does not act out their fantasies, then there is absolutely no reason that anyone would ever have to know they are pedophiles. Even if I knew someone was a pedophile in their fantasies I would not hate them for it. I only hate those who cross the line between fantasy and reality and end up doing terrible things to innocent children.

I agree again...damn it Lais, you're scaring me :p

[Cunae]

You know, I find blind hatred towards pedophiles to be downright disheartening. Pedophiles aren't all horrid people. Not all of them actually DO anything to children. It is a mental problem, and a lot of pedophiles are just as sickened by the news reports as anyone else.

So to label them all monsters is ridiculous.

We have sociopaths on this very board, but they don't go around slaughtering people. Even if they may have that urge at times.

The fact that this boy, if he was indeed a pedophile, brought up his problem means that he was trying to get help. He was trying NOT to give into urges.

Would you be up for killing all those with mental problems?

Sounds like a lot of liberal psycho-babble to me... this stuff and elsewhere in the thread. I am playing a little bit of devil's advocate but I really don't have one ounce of forgiveness or understanding in my heart for these pedo-pigs... those who act it out ...or the guy next door who just jacks off in the dark thinking about your child. The last one hasn't acted on his fantasies... YET.

PS. your final question is ridiculous and totally irrelevant to this subject.

[Meadhbh]

I don't think he did it. But thats not the point even if he did the father had no right to take his son out shoot him in the head. If we want to talk about horrid acts he's just as guilty as the son. If he did in fact do that then the son needed treatment for what ever condition he had not to be drug out and shot in a parking lot.

[Kraheera]

Sounds like a lot of liberal psycho-babble to me... this stuff and elsewhere in the thread. I am playing a little bit of devil's advocate but I really don't have one ounce of forgiveness or understanding in my heart for these pedo-pigs... those who act it out ...or the guy next door who just jacks off in the dark thinking about your child. The last one hasn't acted on his fantasies... YET.

PS. your final question is ridiculous and totally irrelevant to this subject.


No, it really isn't. A lot of the hatred for the 15 year old all stems back towards one thing. FEAR.

People FEAR that all pedophiles are monsters waiting to jump out of a closet. It wasn't so long ago that people FEARED schizophrenics were all psychopathic murderers waiting to stab you.

The thing is, schizophrenia was studied, and then understood. Nowadays, we don't fear that all schizophrenics are violent murderers. We understand that with therapy and medication, most of them are valuable members of society.

So tell me, what is the difference between a schizophrenic who is under control, and a pedophile that is under control? Other than the actual disease itself, mind you. Absolutely nothing. Neither of them breaks any laws. Neither of them harms anyone.

And yet the undercurrent of this thread is that they are all inherently evil, incapable of rational/normal behavior, which is blatantly untrue. Just because someone may have pedophile tendencies does NOT mean they are sexual predators out to rape and molest all the children around them.

So no, the question wasn't ridiculous at all, when one looks at it in context.

So for those who haven't acted out, I do have understanding. Because it must really suck to be wired a certain way and know beyond a doubt that you cannot, must not, act out. Suck hard core.

[ShadowcatX]

The difference between pedophiles and schitzophrenics, is a bit more than you make it out to be. Schitzophrenia, as you have mentioned, has been studied, there are medications and therapy proven to help many schitzophrenics. Pedophilia, mainly due to cultural attitudes, has not been studied as in depth, and to my knoweldge, there's not any great medications that help them, and the meds that do help them are basically designed to kill their sex drive. I would also like to point out that the sex drive is one of the most powerful urges a person has, telling pedophiles "abstinance only" works about as well for them as it does for everyone else, which is to say, very VERY little.

Another difference is that schitzophrenics, if they do murder someone, are likely to be incarcerated for life. Pedophiles aren't and are the most likely group, IIRC to reoffend. That's yet another reason people hate and fear them.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are valid reasons to be more worried about a pedophile than a schitzophrenic, but those reasons are because our culture has focused on curing one and hating the other, and until our culture shifts, I doubt the focus will change overly much.

[Corvis Canis Latrans]

Just wondering if anyone has thought that maybe he thought he did something wrong and wasnt sure? Not to be confused with knowing he did something wrong.

Just a thought that popped into my head.

Exactly.

Example: In most families hugging and kissing is acceptable as a gesture of affection. In a few, depending on the relative who does it, it can be considered molestation and/or harassment.

My grandma thought it was appropriate to give everyone wet slobbery kisses on the face, usually right on the mouth.

I thought it was gross.

It never occurred to me to consider it sexual.

But what if I had learned from it and thought it was appropriate, done it to a cousin on the other side of the family, and then be told it's wrong, question it, and ask someone? Worse, if that cousin were younger than me, and it was considered inappropriate, I could well be accused of molestation or harassment, when it was something intended as a simple act of affection. Now, I always thought spit was so gross that I couldn't stand the thought of kissing someone else like that, so it wasn't an issue, but another person without the same hangups?

It could have been something as innocent as that, and in adolescence it would be a perfectly logical question to ask.

"Mom, I think I might have done something bad, I gave her a wet kiss."

Hell, what I did have when I was younger was personal space issues, and tended to hug and touch more than I should've, and that did make people uncomfortable, but once people explained, I stopped....not without apparently permanently alienating one of my (yes, younger, I was maybe twelve and she was eight or nine, don't quite remember) cousins first....my mind didn't make the connect between touch and sexuality until she pointed it out to me, and I was at an age that I was still grossed out and thought she was in the wrong and a pervert for having thought of my actions in that light.

It quietly ended there, and we've never spoken again. Which makes me kind of sad in retrospect, and angry, but nothing to be done now.

If it'd happened today I'd probably end up in counselling and scarred for being accused of having done something wrong without ever having intended to, out of sheer ignorance of what was appropriate.

If I'd had a father like this shit, I'd be dead for asking questions about basic social boundaries.

[Corvis Canis Latrans]

Sounds like a lot of liberal psycho-babble to me... this stuff and elsewhere in the thread. I am playing a little bit of devil's advocate but I really don't have one ounce of forgiveness or understanding in my heart for these pedo-pigs... those who act it out ...or the guy next door who just jacks off in the dark thinking about your child. The last one hasn't acted on his fantasies... YET.



If we arrested people for the laws they broke in their fantasies, there wouldn't be a free person on the planet.

I'm sure there's not a single person on the board who has not fantasized some sort of violence, putting a person in their place, revenge for perceived wrongs.

We're probably almost all of us sickened by some of our own fantasies, but it is human nature to have them.

And those of us who have them, I could argue are therefore much stronger and thus more ethical for not having acted on them than those people who have never had them at all. We've confronted it, know we are sickened by it....or perhaps there are a few who aren't but have reasoned with themselves and by simple strength of ethics and logic have resisted acting on it.

Anyone who is not wired or at least conditioned to be sickened by those fantasies, who still manages to resist them by the strength of their character, is a lot stronger than those who never have those fantasies at all.

[Kraheera]

If we arrested people for the laws they broke in their fantasies, there wouldn't be a free person on the planet.

I'm sure there's not a single person on the board who has not fantasized some sort of violence, putting a person in their place, revenge for perceived wrongs.

We're probably almost all of us sickened by some of our own fantasies, but it is human nature to have them.

And those of us who have them, I could argue are therefore much stronger and thus more ethical for not having acted on them than those people who have never had them at all. We've confronted it, know we are sickened by it....or perhaps there are a few who aren't but have reasoned with themselves and by simple strength of ethics and logic have resisted acting on it.

Anyone who is not wired or at least conditioned to be sickened by those fantasies, who still manages to resist them by the strength of their character, is a lot stronger than those who never have those fantasies at all.


Glad someone else got what I was saying. The sheer hatred towards this mental disorder bothers me. It wasn't that long ago that we treated other mental disorders this way.

Shadowcat - It is true that we haven't studied it, again because our culture is uncomfortable with it.

And that's a damned shame. 100 years ago, women didn't get help with a lot of their issues, thanks to the fact that our culture was 'uncomfortable' with the idea. We've grown beyond that. I'm waiting for us to get beyond this one too.

There's no way to help pedophiles if we don't study the condition. And to study the condition requires we set aside our basic distaste for their problem.

[ShadowcatX]

Glad someone else got what I was saying. The sheer hatred towards this mental disorder bothers me. It wasn't that long ago that we treated other mental disorders this way.

Shadowcat - It is true that we haven't studied it, again because our culture is uncomfortable with it.

And that's a damned shame. 100 years ago, women didn't get help with a lot of their issues, thanks to the fact that our culture was 'uncomfortable' with the idea. We've grown beyond that. I'm waiting for us to get beyond this one too.

There's no way to help pedophiles if we don't study the condition. And to study the condition requires we set aside our basic distaste for their problem.

I agree 100%. However, until that happens, there is a difference between a condition that is treatable and treated and one that is not. That's all I meant.

[Terra Mater]

The son told the mom first and she obviously heard enough to tell the father. So all this "maybe it wasn't that bad" crap people are laying down is only showing that they failed to read and retain the story.

Everyone arguing this from logic is wasting their time. If your own child told you he had molested his toddler sister you aren't gonna waste time thinking nor are you likely to have the ability. The myriad of issues that one happening covers are gonna bring up so many feelings you will either run amok in your own manner or curl up in a ball in the corner.

This is exactly what "temporary insanity" is. You cannot explain the popping of gears to someone whose gears haven't popped and do not need to explain it to someone who has.

Instead of spewing all the hate, go spend some time with your own kids and enjoy them at their best. This family hates themselves enough without the rest of us adding fuel to the damned fire.

[memnoch]

The son told the mom first and she obviously heard enough to tell the father. So all this "maybe it wasn't that bad" crap people are laying down is only showing that they failed to read and retain the story.

Everyone arguing this from logic is wasting their time. If your own child told you he had molested his toddler sister you aren't gonna waste time thinking nor are you likely to have the ability. The myriad of issues that one happening covers are gonna bring up so many feelings you will either run amok in your own manner or curl up in a ball in the corner.

This is exactly what "temporary insanity" is. You cannot explain the popping of gears to someone whose gears haven't popped and do not need to explain it to someone who has.

Instead of spewing all the hate, go spend some time with your own kids and enjoy them at their best. This family hates themselves enough without the rest of us adding fuel to the damned fire.

Exactly, maybe Lais and I weren't so clear in saying we understood, but this is exactly what I understand...I understand how the emotions that would go into having a child molested could cause me to black out and snap, possibly lasting a couple hours.

The kid admitted it, which while it may not hold up in court it would definitely cause the emotional reaction and possible temporary insanity

[Caitlin.ann]

Here's what we know.

There is no evidence the teen molested the 3 year old.
The teen was murdered execution style by a guardian.

The adult should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. However passing "temporary insanity" off on a jury will be easier said than done, especially when the prosecution points out the methodical, premeditated aspects of the murder and the appeal to emotion of a child pleading for their life at the hands of their guardian.

[Infinite Grey]

http://www.llrx.com/features/falseconfessions.htm

I nice resource list that I suggest the "he admitted to it" crowd might benefit from reading.

You'll soon see why confessions are only slightly better than eye witness accounts... both are among the least reliable of evidences. But jurors love them, they lap them up, and it sucks.

[memnoch]

http://www.llrx.com/features/falseconfessions.htm

I nice resource list that I suggest the "he admitted to it" crowd might benefit from reading.

You'll soon see why confessions are only slightly better than eye witness accounts... both are among the least reliable of evidences. But jurors love them, they lap them up, and it sucks.

I don't see many people saying his confession means he absolutely did anything, however, as pointed out, it is quite enough to cause someone to snap.

[TuathaSidhe]

The son told the mom first and she obviously heard enough to tell the father.So all this "maybe it wasn't that bad" crap people are laying down is only showing that they failed to read and retain the story.

Or, maybe they read it and they just dont get the same thing from it as you do. And im sure if she didnt tell his father then she would be seen as the bad guy. As his father he has a right to know, big or small...yes?



Everyone arguing this from logic is wasting their time. If your own child told you he had molested his toddler sister you aren't gonna waste time thinking nor are you likely to have the ability. The myriad of issues that one happening covers are gonna bring up so many feelings you will either run amok in your own manner or curl up in a ball in the corner.

I like how you know what people will do, even without knowing them. That takes talent!


This is exactly what "temporary insanity" is.[/B] You cannot explain the popping of gears to someone whose gears haven't popped and do not need to explain it to someone who has.

I disagree...I'll leave it at that


Instead of spewing all the hate, go spend some time with your own kids and enjoy them at their best. This family hates themselves enough without the rest of us adding fuel to the damned fire.

While ive seen people be passionate about their view point, the only hate ive seen is a few towards the kid with little to know evidence on what he actually did.

[Nox_Mortus]

I don't see many people saying his confession means he absolutely did anything, however, as pointed out, it is quite enough to cause someone to snap.

perhaps, but it in no way excuses this mans actions, contrary to what some people here seem to think. Especially considering that this was premeditated and not a rage killing.

[Infinite Grey]

I don't see many people saying his confession means he absolutely did anything, however, as pointed out, it is quite enough to cause someone to snap.


Errr how quickly you forget.


It said the boy made a confession to his mother - what other proof do you want?


ummm, don't know if you know this but the justice system DOES take confessions....they have these things called interview rooms where it happens quite often...


Street justice. Saved the tax payers plenty. And they'll prolly plea bargain the dad.



I am a little hard on pedophiles... I wish all of them were simply executed right off, hopefully by one of their victims but then by a parent if the victim is too young. I have no mercy for these monsters and find no place for them on the planet I call home. Let's not waste a dime on a trial or token jail time. The less time I have to share oxygen with them, the better.
(Obviously a confession is good enough for MC)

These are the blatant examples. Others have been arguing from the assumption that the Kid was guilty - unfortunately it doesn't work that way; he was innocent as he never stood trial (and there was no physical evidence to suggest he had done anything).

[memnoch]

perhaps, but it in no way excuses this mans actions, contrary to what some people here seem to think. Especially considering that this was premeditated and not a rage killing.

Have you ever become so enraged you have blacked out? You can think things through that are quite disturbing, and carry them out, yet it still be an act of rage...temporary insanity...a situation like this could be set up in under a half hour. I have blacked out from rage and had it last longer than that...it is very possible.

It doesn't make this man's actions right, yet at the same time it is definitely understandable. I would take it further and say that someone who does not believe they could kill someone who molested their child is either a liar or has issues.

[memnoch]

Errr how quickly you forget.

(Obviously a confession is good enough for MC)

These are the blatant examples. Others have been arguing from the assumption that the Kid was guilty - unfortunately it doesn't work that way; he was innocent as he never stood trial (and there was no physical evidence to suggest he had done anything).

I said I didn't see many, 3 people is not "many".

while many have went with the assumption that he is guilty, just as many are going on the assumption he didn't, when the reality is we don't know either way. My point is whether he did or didn't a confession is enough to cause many to go into a rage. If he did it still doesn't justify his actions, but it does make it even more understandable, but still not right.

[Infinite Grey]

I said I didn't see many, 3 people is not "many". 4 actually, I missed one.



while many have went with the assumption that he is guilty, just as many are going on the assumption he didn't, when the reality is we don't know either way.

If there is not enough evidence to convict or exonerate, a fair person is obligated to side with exoneration.


My point is whether he did or didn't a confession is enough to cause many to go into a rage. If he did it still doesn't justify his actions, but it does make it even more understandable, but still not right.

Errr no - stripping your own son down and executing him in a vacant lot after listening to him beg and plead is not understandable. Kicking the shit out of him, yes; disowning him yeah, handing him over the police yes, all of the above, yes... coldly murdering him in such a fashion? No, I do not understand that.

[memnoch]

4 actually, I missed one.




If there is not enough evidence to convict or exonerate, a fair person is obligated to side with exoneration.



Errr no - stripping your own son down and executing him in a vacant lot after listening to him beg and plead is not understandable. Kicking the shit out of him, yes; disowning him yeah, handing him over the police yes, all of the above, yes... coldly murdering him in such a fashion? No, I do not understand that.

A fair person is obligated to admit they don't know enough on the case based off of a news story, but if you want to consider your position to be the fair one no one can stop you.

If someone, anyone, were to violate my (theoretical) child, I could only begin to imagine how I would react...killing them would be a possibility, maybe it's just that I take molestation a bit more serious than some people.

[Nox_Mortus]

Have you ever become so enraged you have blacked out? You can think things through that are quite disturbing, and carry them out, yet it still be an act of rage...temporary insanity...a situation like this could be set up in under a half hour. I have blacked out from rage and had it last longer than that...it is very possible.

It doesn't make this man's actions right, yet at the same time it is definitely understandable. I would take it further and say that someone who does not believe they could kill someone who molested their child is either a liar or has issues.

Yes I have, but not due to completely unfounded allegatios of a dubious nature, also I never killed anyone. Also the fact that he forced him to strip and shot him execution style points to this not being the case, had he just flipped out and shot him, maybe I could understand that, but that's not what happened.

[TuathaSidhe]

If someone, anyone, were to violate my (theoretical) child, I could only begin to imagine how I would react...killing them would be a possibility, maybe it's just that I take molestation a bit more serious than some people.

No, your not the only one to feel that way. However, I want solid proof before hand, esp. concerning another child.

This case doesnt have that except for on the fathers side of the way he murdered him.

Im glad the law looks at it until innocent until proven guilty still, cause I fear to many people feel its ok to take things like this into their own hands based on knee jerk reactions. (and no, im not talking with anyone in mind)

[Infinite Grey]

A fair person is obligated to admit they don't know enough on the case based off of a news story, but if you want to consider your position to be the fair one no one can stop you.

Due to lack of information, it is fair to presume no wrong doing until wrong doing is proven. Burden of proof and all that. You need to study intellectual honesty and logical reasoning memmy.


If someone, anyone, were to violate my (theoretical) child, I could only begin to imagine how I would react...killing them would be a possibility, maybe it's just that I take molestation a bit more serious than some people.

1> This wasn't just "someone" and/or "anyone", it was his son.
2> Would you methodically strip them naked, drag them to an empty lot, listen to their pleas and then put a bullet through their heads - all on the basis of the confession of a 15 year old boy?

[memnoch]

Yes I have, but not due to completely unfounded allegatios of a dubious nature, also I never killed anyone. Also the fact that he forced him to strip and shot him execution style points to this not being the case, had he just flipped out and shot him, maybe I could understand that, but that's not what happened.

Just because one does not act the exact moment that they find out something like this does not mean it is any less of an act of rage or temporary insanity. Again, we do not know every detail, I'm just saying I could imagine a situation where I could feasibly understand acting in that way...shit, if I walked in on my wife being raped, I could see wanting him dead, but not wanting to kill him in front of her, and have to add that trauma to the trauma she has already faced...I could see taking him by gunpoint somewhere else and killing him execution style.

Again, I don't think it is right, but I'm able to put myself in a situation where I would be able to do that myself.

[Infinite Grey]

Just because one does not act the exact moment that they find out something like this does not mean it is any less of an act of rage or temporary insanity.

Errr, I take it your psychology course is at a community college, yes?

[Nox_Mortus]

Just because one does not act the exact moment that they find out something like this does not mean it is any less of an act of rage or temporary insanity.

Generally speaking, yes it does. nless there was some sort of trigger when he showed up with the shotgun to set him off further, also it's still hard to explain away the fact that he went to a vacant field and forced him to strip, in rage killings that type of humiliation would more than likely occur postmortem, theres also the lack of overkill.

[memnoch]

Due to lack of information, it is fair to presume no wrong doing until wrong doing is proven. Burden of proof and all that. You need to study intellectual honesty and logical reasoning memmy.



1> This wasn't just "someone" and/or "anyone", it was his son.
2> Would you methodically strip them naked, drag them to an empty lot, listen to their pleas and then put a bullet through their heads - all on the basis of the confession of a 15 year old boy?

Intellectual honesty would be admitting you don't have enough information to judge one way or the other.

someone or anyone means I don't give a rats ass if it was another child, my father, my brothers, I don't care who it is.

I don't think that I would, however I understand rage to the point that I can be intellectually honest enough to admit that it is a possibility.

I have a hypothetical for you...but you don't have to answer it, because I don't think I would believe what you would post here...but seriously consider it. If your wife told you she has been cheating on you, she has had the opportunity, she may have had the motive, and you have no reason to believe this is something she would lie about, would you assume that she didn't really do it?

[Sequoia]

Errr, I take it your psychology course is at a community college, yes?

Dude, I've attended psychology courses at a community college, and even THEY don't lend themselves to this sort of "mistaken understanding."

[Sequoia]

I have a hypothetical for you...but you don't have to answer it, because I don't think I would believe what you would post here...but seriously consider it. If your wife told you she has been cheating on you, she has had the opportunity, she may have had the motive, and you have no reason to believe this is something she would lie about, would you assume that she didn't really do it?

If my lover admitted to cheating on me, I would be upset with them...

But I would not slowly, methodically kill them.

[memnoch]

Generally speaking, yes it does. nless there was some sort of trigger when he showed up with the shotgun to set him off further, also it's still hard to explain away the fact that he went to a vacant field and forced him to strip, in rage killings that type of humiliation would more than likely occur postmortem, theres also the lack of overkill.

Really, so a woman can be depressed for 1.5 years and have a couple good days, but someone can not lose their mental stability for 30 minutes after hearing that their child was molested...and I'm accused of living in a world of black and white.

[TuathaSidhe]

saying "hey, I screwed around behind your back"

and

"Hey, so and so told me that they did ____ such and such time ago and wasnt sure if it was wrong or not"

isnt really the same thing to me. /shrug

[memnoch]

If my lover admitted to cheating on me, I would be upset with them...

But I would not slowly, methodically kill them.

I wasn't asking if you would kill them...would you believe them, or assume that they are innocent?

[memnoch]

"Hey, so and so told me that they did ____ such and such time ago and wasnt sure if it was wrong or not"

I didn't see that in the story, are you assuming that is how it happened?

[Cunae]

So tell me, what is the difference between a schizophrenic who is under control, and a pedophile that is under control? Other than the actual disease itself, mind you. Absolutely nothing. Neither of them breaks any laws. Neither of them harms anyone.

And yet the undercurrent of this thread is that they are all inherently evil, incapable of rational/normal behavior, which is blatantly untrue. Just because someone may have pedophile tendencies does NOT mean they are sexual predators out to rape and molest all the children around them.




No, just some of them. Get real.

[TuathaSidhe]

Mem, you say this


Intellectual honesty would be admitting you don't have enough information to judge one way or the other.

but then when referring to the father you say this


but someone can not lose their mental stability for 30 minutes after hearing that their child was molested

so, im a little confused cause that sounds like judgement to me. Consider there is no solid proof the boy actually did anything and we dont know excatly what the mother told him.

[TeamTwig]

Everyone keeps focusing on this confession - when we have no idea what the kid confessed to. Unless I'm behind on updates regarding this story, the kid didn't specifically say "I raped my little sister", he said he did something innapropriate - who knows what his interpretation of innapropriate is?
You can't condemn someone without the facts in my book.

Isn't it just a natural human reaction in a case like this to be in shock? To ask questions first? To find out what really happened? Not take off and plot your own child's murder. I guess I shouldn't generalize - that would be my reaction.

[memnoch]

Mem, you say this



but then when referring to the father you say this



so, im a little confused cause that sounds like judgement to me. Consider there is no solid proof the boy actually did anything and we dont know excatly what the mother told him.

And if you read through my posts you will see me constantly say I could see how one could do this. I didn't say in this case the man did this, however it is definitely a possibility, and those who are judging this man's actions without knowing everything are as bad as those who are judging the boy's actions. We don't know, there are plenty of scenarios that could make every post on here understandable, but we don't know.

[Nox_Mortus]

Really, so a woman can be depressed for 1.5 years and have a couple good days, but someone can not lose their mental stability for 30 minutes after hearing that their child was molested...and I'm accused of living in a world of black and white.

It's not just the time frame, but also the methodology, even then I suppose it's possible, but given the time frame and the way in which he killed the kid, it's highly unlikely.

[memnoch]

Everyone keeps focusing on this confession - when we have no idea what the kid confessed to. Unless I'm behind on updates regarding this story, the kid didn't specifically say "I raped my little sister", he said he did something innapropriate - who knows what his interpretation of innapropriate is?
You can't condemn someone without the facts in my book.

Isn't it just a natural human reaction in a case like this to be in shock? To ask questions first? To find out what really happened? Not take off and plot your own child's murder. I guess I shouldn't generalize - that would be my reaction.

I find it interesting, and to be honest, pure bullshit, that anyone would know how they would react to this...this is one of those things you can only think you know how you would want to react, you could never know exactly how you would react until put in that situation.

[memnoch]

It's not just the time frame, but also the methodology, even then I suppose it's possible, but given the time frame and the way in which he killed the kid, it's highly unlikely.

I agree it is unlikely, but possible, and not knowing the situation I find it disheartening that people could not understand being in any situation where something like this could happen.

[Nox_Mortus]

I find it interesting, and to be honest, pure bullshit, that anyone would know how they would react to this...this is one of those things you can only think you know how you would want to react, you could never know exactly how you would react until put in that situation.

I can honestly say that under the circumstance I wouldn't do what this guy did.


I agree it is unlikely, but possible, and not knowing the situation I find it disheartening that people could not understand being in any situation where something like this could happen.

People aren't understnding due to the fact that the circumstances don't lend themselves to that, if the father walked in on his son raping his daughter and pulled a gun and shot him, then people would probably be more understanding, but that's far from what happened here.

[Infinite Grey]

Intellectual honesty would be admitting you don't have enough information to judge one way or the other.

Intellectually honesty is to side with the null premise until evidence is presented. The default status is innocence, until a person, any person is proven guilty, they remain innocent. Duh.


someone or anyone means I don't give a rats ass if it was another child, my father, my brothers, I don't care who it is.

Whoa there cowboy.


I don't think that I would, however I understand rage to the point that I can be intellectually honest enough to admit that it is a possibility.

Heh, I'm sure many feel the same - but the actions we saw were no rage, they were cold and calculated... not a crime of passion or an instance of temporary insanity - it was lucid, methodological and without any form of compassion.


I have a hypothetical for you...but you don't have to answer it, because I don't think I would believe what you would post here...but seriously consider it.

Memnoch, of the two of us - I have the better record for honesty (points to your threads based on loaded questions).


If your wife told you she has been cheating on you, she has had the opportunity, she may have had the motive, and you have no reason to believe this is something she would lie about, would you assume that she didn't really do it?

Another loaded question I see. You can probably guess my answer, and I can guess where you're going with it - You're attempting to forge an association with an implied dilemma... you also have predetermined qualifier of dishonesty on my behalf if I answer in a manner not congruent with the result you desired.

But to answer, my emotional response would be to believe the confession - yes. But my intellect would want more evidence and would remain skeptical. Now the question you must wonder (if you're so incline) is which would win out? My mind or my emotions?

[TuathaSidhe]

And if you read through my posts you will see me constantly say I could see how one could do this. I didn't say in this case the man did this, however it is definitely a possibility, and those who are judging this man's actions without knowing everything are as bad as those who are judging the boy's actions. We don't know, there are plenty of scenarios that could make every post on here understandable, but we don't know.


regardless of what one understands or doesnt understand, we KNOW what the father did..we do NOT know what the kid did. So I dont really see it as the same thing.

[TeamTwig]

I find it interesting, and to be honest, pure bullshit, that anyone would know how they would react to this...this is one of those things you can only think you know how you would want to react, you could never know exactly how you would react until put in that situation.

Wow - thank you for opening my eyes - and here I thought I knew myself. I must have been an idiot to think that your intellect wasn't so superior, that even in purely personal situations, involving only myself and my own reactions, that you would still be right, and I would still be wrong.

To a degree you are right, I can not say exactly what I would do in this situation, but I do know myself well enough to know that I would not do what this kid's father did. I can promise you that.

[memnoch]

But to answer, my emotional response would be to believe the confession - yes. But my intellect would want more evidence and would remain skeptical. Now the question you must wonder (if you're so incline) is which would win out? My mind or my emotions?

most people would agree with this, some peoples mind would win, other's emotions would win. Now, that is just cheating...imagine something infinitely worse, like say, molestation...a lot more emotional of an issue...I would say very few would allow logic to kick in. The reality is I don't think anyone would know how they would react to that situation unless they were put in that situation. The point of it being that while this potential reaction would be extreme, I think it is a possibility in certain scenarios...one I accept that I myself could make.

[memnoch]

Wow - thank you for opening my eyes - and here I thought I knew myself. I must have been an idiot to think that your intellect wasn't so superior, that even in purely personal situations, involving only myself and my own reactions, that you would still be right, and I would still be wrong.

To a degree you are right, I can not say exactly what I would do in this situation, but I do know myself well enough to know that I would not do what this kid's father did. I can promise you that.

yep, I'm sure you are so in control of yourself that you know exactly what you would and wouldn't do in extreme situations...I hope you are never put into a situation where your belief in your control of every situation is shattered.

[Nox_Mortus]

yep, I'm sure you are so in control of yourself that you know exactly what you would and wouldn't do in extreme situations...I hope you are never put into a situation where your belief in your control of every situation is shattered.

People do tend to be aware of their limits to a degree, this doesn;t really come of as a situation where those limits would really be tested, which is generally during fight or flight, or following repeated psychological trauma. I don't really see evidence for either of those here.

[memnoch]

regardless of what one understands or doesnt understand, we KNOW what the father did..we do NOT know what the kid did. So I dont really see it as the same thing.

based on what the kid did the fathers reaction could be different, if the mother said she wasn't sure what the kid did but that the kid thinks he may have crossed a line, that would result in one response, if the kid told his father that he molested this 3 year old (by the way, molestation does not always leave damage that can be seen by doctors) that would result in another reaction, that could include what this man did.

[TuathaSidhe]

ok, again..mem, you say this


I find it interesting, and to be honest, pure bullshit, that anyone would know how they would react to this...this is one of those things you can only think you know how you would want to react, you could never know exactly how you would react until put in that situation.

but then you say


someone or anyone means I don't give a rats ass if it was another child, my father, my brothers, I don't care who it is.

so you know what you would do? by not caring who it was based on very little evidence..but others dont know what they would do in a situation?

maybe its because I have a headache, its late and im not follwing the posts clearly, but this to me doesnt make sense.

I am a parent, which is why I dont understand the fathers actions. You arent and I think that is why your do understand his actions. I dont know a single parent who could just blindly make this choice, even out of rage or "temporary insanity" unless you hold one child above the next.

If my oldest son told me he did this to his little sister..i KNOW for a FACT I would NOT do what this father did to his son.

[TuathaSidhe]

based on what the kid did the fathers reaction could be different, if the mother said she wasn't sure what the kid did but that the kid thinks he may have crossed a line, that would result in one response, if the kid told his father that he molested this 3 year old (by the way, molestation does not always leave damage that can be seen by doctors) that would result in another reaction, that could include what this man did.


however...talking about the story, the kid didnt tell his father anything, the mother did and we dont know what the mother told the father. I try not to focus on the coulda/shoulda/woulda's. It plays to much on my emotions and brain and bad things happen to me, heh.

[TeamTwig]

yep, I'm sure you are so in control of yourself that you know exactly what you would and wouldn't do in extreme situations...I hope you are never put into a situation where your belief in your control of every situation is shattered.

I think it's astounding that you are arrogant enough to imply that you can predict how I would react to a given situation better than I can predict my own actions.

[Infinite Grey]

most people would agree with this, some peoples mind would win, other's emotions would win. Now, that is just cheating...imagine something infinitely worse, like say, molestation...a lot more emotional of an issue...I would say very few would allow logic to kick in. The reality is I don't think anyone would know how they would react to that situation unless they were put in that situation. The point of it being that while this potential reaction would be extreme, I think it is a possibility in certain scenarios...one I accept that I myself could make.

Considering my past relationships, and the circumstances of their childhoods - I can honestly say how I would react if a loved one were a victim of child molestation (and to have faced the perpetrator). In those cases, logic prevailed. Now in the terms of a child of mine, well I have none (that I know of) - so yeah, I can't say I know for certain what my reaction would be... but in related circumstances healing the victim always superseded taking vengeance on the perpetrator.

[memnoch]

I think it's astounding that you are arrogant enough to imply that you can predict how I would react to a given situation better than I can predict my own actions.

I can't believe you are ignorant enough to believe you know exactly what you would/wouldn't do in extreme situations. Also, I find that you are quite ignorant of the rules considering you have made two personal attacks against me in this thread.

To top it off I find your strawman quite weak, I never said I could predict your actions, as a matter of fact, my point was the opposite, that no one could predict their actions to such a situations, including myself

[TuathaSidhe]

kk, im hitting the hay, my head is pounding and I've not been feeling well so may not be on for bit...im not ignoring anyone :D

have fun and behave :P

[memnoch]

ok, again..mem, you say this



but then you say



so you know what you would do? by not caring who it was based on very little evidence..but others dont know what they would do in a situation?

maybe its because I have a headache, its late and im not follwing the posts clearly, but this to me doesnt make sense.

I am a parent, which is why I dont understand the fathers actions. You arent and I think that is why your do understand his actions. I dont know a single parent who could just blindly make this choice, even out of rage or "temporary insanity" unless you hold one child above the next.

If my oldest son told me he did this to his little sister..i KNOW for a FACT I would NOT do what this father did to his son.

yes, I said I didn't know what actions I would take, and then I stated that I didn't care who did it. I know I would react, and I know I would react no matter who the person was, to what extent I would react is the unknown. Would I call the cops, it's possible. Would I remove myself and the molested child from the situation, it is possible, would I sit down and consider all options, I don't know, would I beat the shit out of the person, it is likely, would I kill them, it is a possibility, would I do it in such a way to remove the person I was going to kill from my home so no one else could see my actions, I would hope that if I were to kill someone I would care enough about my family to not do it in my own house.

Again, I hope you are not put in a situation where you have to face something so terrible that you have to find out if what you know you would do and what you do may not match up.

[TeamTwig]

I can't believe you are ignorant enough to believe you know exactly what you would/wouldn't do in extreme situations. Also, I find that you are quite ignorant of the rules considering you have made two personal attacks against me in this thread.

To top it off I find your strawman quite weak, I never said I could predict your actions, as a matter of fact, my point was the opposite, that no one could predict their actions to such a situations, including myself


I never said that I know exactly what I would do in a given situation - in fact I said that I agreed with you to an extent in that respect - but that I do know myself well enough to know that I would not go to the extremes that this child's father did.
I was not personally attacking you - only declaring that you thinking you can predict my actions better than I can is BS.

Also, as far as personal attacks go - if I am ignorant of the rules in this regard, you are as well - these are not the first posts of yours that I have read. Should you feel that I am personally attacking you, by all means report me. Something tells me that you skin is thick enough that you're not whining for an apology from me.

[memnoch]

I never said that I know exactly what I would do in a given situation - in fact I said that I agreed with you to an extent in that respect - but that I do know myself well enough to know that I would not go to the extremes that this child's father did.
I was not personally attacking you - only declaring that you thinking you can predict my actions better than I can is BS.

Also, as far as personal attacks go - if I am ignorant of the rules in this regard, you are as well - these are not the first posts of yours that I have read. Should you feel that I am personally attacking you, by all means report me. Something tells me that you skin is thick enough that you're not whining for an apology from me.

Again, I hope neither of us ever find out who is right in this situation. The personal attack in the most recent post was calling me arrogant, and I'm not whining for an apology, just pointing it out so you don't have to learn the way I did.

Also you are wrong about my knowledge of the rules, through a dozen or so bans, and a few dozen warnings, and probably over a hundred discussions with admins over the past 7 years, I am extremely aware of the rules.

Also, I rarely report things, you don't have to worry about that, but others do, just giving you a heads up so you don't learn by experience, as I have been extremely fortunate with the admins mercy over the years, few are so lucky.

[Vampiel]

yes, I said I didn't know what actions I would take, and then I stated that I didn't care who did it. I know I would react, and I know I would react no matter who the person was, to what extent I would react is the unknown. Would I call the cops, it's possible. Would I remove myself and the molested child from the situation, it is possible, would I sit down and consider all options, I don't know, would I beat the shit out of the person, it is likely, would I kill them, it is a possibility, would I do it in such a way to remove the person I was going to kill from my home so no one else could see my actions, I would hope that if I were to kill someone I would care enough about my family to not do it in my own house.

Again, I hope you are not put in a situation where you have to face something so terrible that you have to find out if what you know you would do and what you do may not match up.

Very sad but interesting predicament.

My first thoughts, if I found out someone molested my daughter, emotionally I would be in an uproar, what would come in that moment I agree... I don't know how I would react. However I know its hardwired into my brain that someone as young as 15 and someone much older makes a big difference to me. If it was someone much older I likely wouldn't hesistate to bring a lot of harm upon them. Then on top of it, it would be my own son so that would bring a lot of other emotions. Thinking about it in a logical way from seeing it and analyzing it now, I would more feel a failure as a parent than harming my son, however emotionally in the moment I dont know how I would react. Although I certianly don't think I would go as far as to execute them, especially if they are that young, even in the moment.

Given I understand that a parent is not in control of their child, but from the reaction of the father, it seems to me that his emotional response to this is very telling in how he raised the child (reacting in such a violent way toward his own child seems very controlling and instant judgement). From that I do hold the father more accountable than anyone although I don't sympathize with the son, because he is his own person. Even at the age of 15 there is some accountability. This is really a grey area, but in the end I think the father that did this should be held accountable for his actions for murder despite what emotions took place, not to mention may be somewhat accountable for what took place in the first place.

Given I have never been a parent, but if your 15 yr old son molests your 3 yr old daughter, does the parent(s) hold any responsibility for that?

It's a loaded question and I have no experience with raising children...

Either way I think the father should be held accountable for his actions harshly despite what "emotional" responses came from it even if I do understand what emtions that could trigger, personally I would feel at fault for the whole situation and would embrace punishment after thinking through it.

[ShadowcatX]

Here's what we know.

There is no evidence the teen molested the 3 year old.
The teen was murdered execution style by a guardian.

The adult should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. However passing "temporary insanity" off on a jury will be easier said than done, especially when the prosecution points out the methodical, premeditated aspects of the murder and the appeal to emotion of a child pleading for their life at the hands of their guardian.

Temporary insanity, to my understanding, hasn't been used as a legit defense (ie. successful) in over 50 years.

That said temporary insanity doesn't mean going completely nuts, it means a temporary inability to tell right from wrong. If he did this in public, and talked about it / confessed it, it could support the idea that he didn't know right from wrong making temporary insanity an easier defense.

[TuathaSidhe]

Again, I hope you are not put in a situation where you have to face something so terrible that you have to find out if what you know you would do and what you do may not match up.


that point is moot as i havent said if I have been or havent been. but thank you for the concern (seriously, not a jab :P)

[ShadowcatX]

Memnoch:
I think you're right, people don't know how they will react in certain situations. Those situations, IMO, include walking in and finding someone you care about being raped. They do not include hearing about it after the fact. (As someone said, actions can be unpredictable during a fight or flight response.) If a third hand account can cause a person to black out with rage, they need help.

That said, I do understand why the dad did what he did. I don't agree with it, or support it, but I understand it. I agree with whomever said that this feels more like a killing because of property damage than it feels like a killing because of a harmed family member.


Infinite Grey:
To a certain extent you're right in that the presumption of innocence should be maintained when there isn't enough information to condemn someone. However, when a person makes a confession that they do not benefit from and that will hurt them greatly, most people accept that at face value, especially when the person making the confession is known to them as an honest person.

In the hypothetical about your wife, I highly doubt you would want proof unless you generally distrust your wife to begin with. You may want details, you may want the bastard's name and address, but I highly doubt you're going to want proof. I know proof is the last thing I wanted in that situation (gf not wife, thank gods).

[Laisrean]

"Temporary insanity" is a bunch of bullshit, imho. It just means you were extremely pissed off when you did your crime.

[memnoch]

Temporary insanity, to my understanding, hasn't been used as a legit defense (ie. successful) in over 50 years.

That said temporary insanity doesn't mean going completely nuts, it means a temporary inability to tell right from wrong. If he did this in public, and talked about it / confessed it, it could support the idea that he didn't know right from wrong making temporary insanity an easier defense.

temporary insanity may not have been used as an excuse for innocence, but I know it has been used in the past couple of years to lower charges and sentences.

[ShadowcatX]

"Temporary insanity" is a bunch of bullshit, imho. It just means you were extremely pissed off when you did your crime.

Not necessarilly. It means that you couldn't tell right from wrong at the time. That can be from a number of emotions, anger included.

For example, a person who kills someone else because they were on a (theoretical) medication that prevented them from knowing right from wrong might be able to plead temporary insanity without having any emotional involvement in the murder at all.

I'd love to see a brain washing / insanity case.

[ShadowcatX]

temporary insanity may not have been used as an excuse for innocence, but I know it has been used in the past couple of years to lower charges and sentences.

Interesting, I thought temporary insanity was an all or nothing thing. I would've thought they'd use diminished capacity to lower charges and sentences.

But this isn't the first time I've been wrong, probably won't be the last.

[memnoch]

Interesting, I thought temporary insanity was an all or nothing thing. I would've thought they'd use diminished capacity to lower charges and sentences.

But this isn't the first time I've been wrong, probably won't be the last.

nope, temp insanity doesn't usually forgive your mistakes, but shows that you aren't a threat to others, basically that under normal circumstances you wouldn't do the same thing again...and since a major part of incarceration is to protect people from those who would willfully do wrong it removes that aspect.

[Phoenix Blue]

TeamTwig, memnoch -- The sniping and personal attacks will end NOW.

[sarabethv]

I find it interesting, and to be honest, pure bullshit, that anyone would know how they would react to this...this is one of those things you can only think you know how you would want to react, you could never know exactly how you would react until put in that situation.



Again, I hope you are not put in a situation where you have to face something so terrible that you have to find out if what you know you would do and what you do may not match up.

Lets just say, I KNOW how my mother would/did react and I KNOW how I would/did react. Neither of us chose to execute the perpetrator.

[Kraheera]

No, just some of them. Get real.


What exactly do you mean by that? I'm thinking realistically. If everyone with wrong tendencies acted on them, this world would be a hellhole.

We'd be drowning in child molestation cases, and we aren't.

According to Dr. Herbert Wagemaker (a pretty well known psychiatrist in that field of study), nearly 4% of the population in the US has tendencies towards children. Let's round that to a nice even number. 4% of 330,000,000 people is 13,200,000. So 13.2 million people in the US are attracted to children.

Do you see the logic? I do. This unreasoning hatred towards people that haven't acted out on their tendencies is beneath us as a whole. FEAR causes hatred, and that kind of fear can only flourish where there hasn't been studies.

That's all I am saying. The condition needs more study, so that more effective treatment is available. Instead of railing against the evils of the tendency, why not rail against the culture that refuses to look into the problem in a logical manner?

[Cunae]

What exactly do you mean by that? I'm thinking realistically. If everyone with wrong tendencies acted on them, this world would be a hellhole.

We'd be drowning in child molestation cases, and we aren't.

According to Dr. Herbert Wagemaker (a pretty well known psychiatrist in that field of study), nearly 4% of the population in the US has tendencies towards children. Let's round that to a nice even number. 4% of 330,000,000 people is 13,200,000. So 13.2 million people in the US are attracted to children.

Do you see the logic? I do. This unreasoning hatred towards people that haven't acted out on their tendencies is beneath us as a whole. FEAR causes hatred, and that kind of fear can only flourish where there hasn't been studies.

That's all I am saying. The condition needs more study, so that more effective treatment is available. Instead of railing against the evils of the tendency, why not rail against the culture that refuses to look into the problem in a logical manner?

First, I submit that millions of child abuse victims never speak about what happened or is happening to them.

Second, a little fear is healthy when it comes to protecting children. And it isn't hatred that causes this fear--it's EXPERIENCE.

[Kraheera]

First, I submit that millions of child abuse victims never speak about what happened or is happening to them.

Second, fear is healthy when it comes to protecting children. And it isn't hatred that causes this fear--it's EXPERIENCE.


Oh yes. Let's fall back on the "think of the children" argument. Look, I will be the first person to offer up a lynching noose for someone that actually hurts a child. But I will not condone unreasoning hatred towards those that haven't actually committed a crime.

As distasteful as it may be to most of us, having FANTASIES is not a crime. Having tendencies is NOT a crime.

And when people with your opinion are surrounding them, why should anyone with that problem ask for help? They won't get it. All they'll get is derision, scorn, and most likely, violence.

One could postulate that the reason for so many children being molested is because those with such problems DON'T seek help due to the very nature of those around them.

[Sequoia]

What exactly do you mean by that? I'm thinking realistically. If everyone with wrong tendencies acted on them, this world would be a hellhole.

We'd be drowning in child molestation cases, and we aren't.

According to Dr. Herbert Wagemaker (a pretty well known psychiatrist in that field of study), nearly 4% of the population in the US has tendencies towards children. Let's round that to a nice even number. 4% of 330,000,000 people is 13,200,000. So 13.2 million people in the US are attracted to children.

Do you see the logic? I do. This unreasoning hatred towards people that haven't acted out on their tendencies is beneath us as a whole. FEAR causes hatred, and that kind of fear can only flourish where there hasn't been studies.

That's all I am saying. The condition needs more study, so that more effective treatment is available. Instead of railing against the evils of the tendency, why not rail against the culture that refuses to look into the problem in a logical manner?

This.

I know someone who is attracted to teenagers, as well as adults. This is not exactly pedophilia, but the name is escaping me at the moment. Anyway, the point is that he would absolutely NEVER act on it. He is embarrassed of it. He doesn't choose to be attracted by youths; he doesn't like it at all. It is a source of great shame and embarrassment for him. Only his closest friends know, and even then, it was because he confided in them, not because he stares at youths eerily. (Let me make that absolutely clear: He does NOT stare at youths eerily. Read that. Thank you.)

Our culture thinks it is "creepy," indeed even "wrong," to be attracted to, say, an eight-year-old girl. Yet there was a point in history, where it was perfectly acceptable to marry an eight-year-old girl to a grown man, and expect them to copulate.

I'm not condoning pedophilia. And there is absolutely no excuse for it in our day and age. But clearly, there was a point in time in which normal, healthy adults saw nothing wrong with marrying (and having sexual relations with) children, usually girls.

This suggests that the biological/psychological "norm" for sexuality is not necessarily controlled by some arbitrary age, such as "18" or "16" or whatever your local jurisdiction has settled upon. Because let's face it - the masses of "school girl" porno out there aren't actually referencing college students. They are referencing teenage girls, even if they have to say "Oh, but we're 18," for legal reasons.

None of this condones actual cases of molestation and rape. But perhaps it can help explain, at least with older cases, just what exactly is going on. A culture imposing an arbitrary number, when biology may be telling someone something completely different.

Now, sexual attraction to toddlers and the like is pretty much beyond me. But I'm not going to condemn to death those who refuse to act on it.

If we were all condemned for our very thoughts, the world would have died a thousand times over. Unless you really are that pure, and defecate rainbows and all that.

[Cunae]

Oh yes. Let's fall back on the "think of the children" argument. Look, I will be the first person to offer up a lynching noose for someone that actually hurts a child. But I will not condone unreasoning hatred towards those that haven't actually committed a crime.

As distasteful as it may be to most of us, having FANTASIES is not a crime. Having tendencies is NOT a crime.

And when people with your opinion are surrounding them, why should anyone with that problem ask for help? They won't get it. All they'll get is derision, scorn, and most likely, violence.

One could postulate that the reason for so many children being molested is because those with such problems DON'T seek help due to the very nature of those around them.

Exactly how do you define a "tendency"? And would you let an uncle with such "tendencies" take your kids for a day?

[Corvis Canis Latrans]

Exactly how do you define a "tendency"? And would you let an uncle with such "tendencies" take your kids for a day?

Somehow, that isn't the same thing as killing them all, as you were suggesting before.

[Sequoia]

Exactly how do you define a "tendency"? And would you let an uncle with such "tendencies" take your kids for a day?

It depends. If he has been absolutely forthright with me, and absolutely restrained in every single situation that he's ever been in regarding children, yeah, I might. It would really depend on my gut feeling of the situation, and his previous actions. How much I trusted him.

But MC, nobody here is saying, "Let's let pedophiles run day care centers! =DDD"

They're simply saying, "Let's not kill all people with a predisposed attraction to kids. Let's get them some treatment, instead. So that they DON'T go on to hurt kids."

I realize that this topic is personal for you, but you really are not employing logic in this situation.

[Cunae]

It depends. If he has been absolutely forthright with me, and absolutely restrained in every single situation that he's ever been in regarding children, yeah, I might. It would really depend on my gut feeling of the situation, and his previous actions. How much I trusted him.

But MC, nobody here is saying, "Let's let pedophiles run day care centers! =DDD"

They're simply saying, "Let's not kill all people with a predisposed attraction to kids. Let's get them some treatment, instead. So that they DON'T go on to hurt kids."

I realize that this topic is personal for you, but you really are not employing logic in this situation.

True enough, but I would never EVER let anyone with such tendencies around my kids. Period. To me, that's just insane. And that's if I even knew about it. Bad enough when we don't.

[aranarose]

True enough, but I would never EVER let anyone with such tendencies around my kids. Period. To me, that's just insane. And that's if I even knew about it. Bad enough when we don't.

How would you know? If someone never acted out on their personal fantasies, and never spoke of them, how would you know?

[Lunacie]

What exactly do you mean by that? I'm thinking realistically. If everyone with wrong tendencies acted on them, this world would be a hellhole.

We'd be drowning in child molestation cases, and we aren't.

According to Dr. Herbert Wagemaker (a pretty well known psychiatrist in that field of study), nearly 4% of the population in the US has tendencies towards children. Let's round that to a nice even number. 4% of 330,000,000 people is 13,200,000. So 13.2 million people in the US are attracted to children.

Do you see the logic? I do. This unreasoning hatred towards people that haven't acted out on their tendencies is beneath us as a whole. FEAR causes hatred, and that kind of fear can only flourish where there hasn't been studies.

That's all I am saying. The condition needs more study, so that more effective treatment is available. Instead of railing against the evils of the tendency, why not rail against the culture that refuses to look into the problem in a logical manner?

O/T:
This has nothing to do with the point you're making - but I don't think your math is correct here. Which could make your point seem suspect.

[aranarose]

O/T:
This has nothing to do with the point you're making - but I don't think your math is correct here. Which could make your point seem suspect.

Her math is correct. I just checked it on a calculator :D

[Lunacie]

Her math is correct. I just checked it on a calculator :D

http://www.paganforum.com/Smileys/custom/sorry1.gif (javascript:void(0);) You're both right. I must have had a "blonde moment" earlier. Yeah, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. :hahugh:

[ShadowcatX]

Exactly how do you define a "tendency"? And would you let an uncle with such "tendencies" take your kids for a day?

A tendancy is an attraction. I'm attracted to a certain type of girl. A pedophile is attracted to a different type of person, specifically a prepubescent child. However, just as I'm perfectly capable of restraining myself from hitting on every girl I'm attracted to, so is a pedophile.

The thing is, eventually, I'm going to find a girl worth hitting on. A pedophile isn't. That is I can find an acceptable outlet, a pedophile can not.

Having a want to cast out or harm all of the pedophiles prevents the ones who want treatment from coming forward.

[aranarose]

Having a want to cast out or harm all of the pedophiles prevents the ones who want treatment from coming forward.

This. It also likely contributes to pedophiles finally acting out on their urges, no matter how much they might want to restrain themselves. They can't ask for help, because if they ask for help they are immediately shamed and labeled. So they have to try to suppress the urges by themselves, which can work for awhile, but eventually, the fantasies can get so strong that they can't stop themselves. Whereas if they'd been able to seek treatment, and express their fantasies in a safe and controlled manner, they'd have never reached the point of hurting a child.

[ShadowcatX]

True enough, but I would never EVER let anyone with such tendencies around my kids. Period. To me, that's just insane. And that's if I even knew about it. Bad enough when we don't.

I wouldn't trust them with my theoretical children right now, either. However, that's a far cry from saying they should be killed off. That attitude, the kill 'em off one, can keep the people who have that attraction from talking about it, from getting help for it, and prevent it from being studied.

[Kraheera]

I wouldn't trust them with my theoretical children right now, either. However, that's a far cry from saying they should be killed off. That attitude, the kill 'em off one, can keep the people who have that attraction from talking about it, from getting help for it, and prevent it from being studied.


Which is exactly what my original statement (that led to the O/T argument) was meant to convey. By showing such hateful disdain, situations like this could keep occuring.

We don't know exactly what the teen said. Everythign I've read says that he admitted to something inappropriate... which could be something as heinous as touching, or perhaps was somethign quite innocent that made him feel inappropriate.

So in his confession, where we could have caught such tendencies at an early age and kept them from manifesting into physical action, he instead was condemned to death because his FATHER was not willing to wait and work through it.

This is not a theoretical. This is a FACT. This child came forward and said he may have done something wrong... and instead of letting courts/doctors deal with it, his FATHER killed him. Brutally. And humiliatingly so.

But oddly, a lot of folks don't see that. They see a "pedo-pig" that got what he "deserved".

[Corvis Canis Latrans]

Which is exactly what my original statement (that led to the O/T argument) was meant to convey. By showing such hateful disdain, situations like this could keep occuring.

We don't know exactly what the teen said. Everythign I've read says that he admitted to something inappropriate... which could be something as heinous as touching, or perhaps was somethign quite innocent that made him feel inappropriate.

So in his confession, where we could have caught such tendencies at an early age and kept them from manifesting into physical action, he instead was condemned to death because his FATHER was not willing to wait and work through it.

This is not a theoretical. This is a FACT. This child came forward and said he may have done something wrong... and instead of letting courts/doctors deal with it, his FATHER killed him. Brutally. And humiliatingly so.

But oddly, a lot of folks don't see that. They see a "pedo-pig" that got what he "deserved".

Exactly.

[Corvis Canis Latrans]

Question for all of you.

What constitutes "molested"?

I'm going to bet that there are a lot of different answers as to where the line is drawn and who can do what.

Would you consider a hug to be molestation depending on the relative?
A kiss?

Some obnoxious kid incessantly poking at another, in their space?

Hell, what about that weird kid who threatens to kiss another kid just to get the other kid to leave them the eff alone?

[Caitlin.ann]

I would say inappropriate touching, manual stimulation, oral stimulation, etc. qualifies as "molestation". I think "penetration" would fall under "rape".

[Infinite Grey]

Infinite Grey:
To a certain extent you're right in that the presumption of innocence should be maintained when there isn't enough information to condemn someone. However, when a person makes a confession that they do not benefit from and that will hurt them greatly, most people accept that at face value, especially when the person making the confession is known to them as an honest person.

Irregardless, the most honest person can confess to a crime they did not commit for a range of a reasons. The complexity of human motivations makes the study of false confessions a fascinating subject really... but my point isn't that confessions are not evidence, but not evidence enough - the frequency of false confessions (and/or exaggerated and/or poorly articulated confessions) is sufficiently high enough that they should not be enough to condemn an individual alone.


In the hypothetical about your wife, I highly doubt you would want proof unless you generally distrust your wife to begin with. You may want details, you may want the bastard's name and address, but I highly doubt you're going to want proof. I know proof is the last thing I wanted in that situation (gf not wife, thank gods).

You're underestimating my skeptical nature here - let's just say my relationships before my wife have taught me that (my) emotional responses are not always the most advantageous or desirable.

[ShadowcatX]

You're underestimating my skeptical nature here - let's just say my relationships before my wife have taught me that (my) emotional responses are not always the most advantageous or desirable.

Have you thought about what types of proof would be acceptable? I mean, unless you're willing to take motel receipts, assuming such exist, most forms of proof are a bit disgusting and IMO quite possibly psychologically damaging to see in person. Different strokes for different folks I guess, I couldn't handle that.

[Kraheera]

Have you thought about what types of proof would be acceptable? I mean, unless you're willing to take motel receipts, assuming such exist, most forms of proof are a bit disgusting and IMO quite possibly psychologically damaging to see in person. Different strokes for different folks I guess, I couldn't handle that.


His point still stands... especially in this case. Without any idea of what the teen actually SAID... we would have to assume that whatever he confessed to was mild inappropriateness, not necessarily a criminal act.

And when it comes to sex crimes in particular, the evidence usually IS pretty disgusting. But that's part of what justice is.

[ShadowcatX]

Which is exactly what my original statement (that led to the O/T argument) was meant to convey. By showing such hateful disdain, situations like this could keep occuring.

We don't know exactly what the teen said. Everythign I've read says that he admitted to something inappropriate... which could be something as heinous as touching, or perhaps was somethign quite innocent that made him feel inappropriate.

So in his confession, where we could have caught such tendencies at an early age and kept them from manifesting into physical action, he instead was condemned to death because his FATHER was not willing to wait and work through it.

This is not a theoretical. This is a FACT. This child came forward and said he may have done something wrong... and instead of letting courts/doctors deal with it, his FATHER killed him. Brutally. And humiliatingly so.

But oddly, a lot of folks don't see that. They see a "pedo-pig" that got what he "deserved".

I've been agreeing with you. I don't think the father should've done it. I understand possible motivations, but I don't agree with them.

And back to the actual topic, I feel sorry for the girl, here she is, maybe having been abused, maybe not. Either way, her older brother is dead and her dad is in jail. And her dad is the type of person who would strip his own son and shoot him. Not a great recipe for a good home life. And the mom, I mean, how bad does she have to feel knowing that what she told her husband, the man she swore to love forever and blah blah blah, got her son killed.

[ShadowcatX]

His point still stands... especially in this case. Without any idea of what the teen actually SAID... we would have to assume that whatever he confessed to was mild inappropriateness, not necessarily a criminal act.

And when it comes to sex crimes in particular, the evidence usually IS pretty disgusting. But that's part of what justice is.

I'm not saying proof shouldn't have been asked for in this case, just that when a confession comes from a known and trusted source, most people don't question it. Heck, most people don't think to question it.

My first post was that the father had no right to be judge, jury, and executioner. I stand by that.

[ShadowcatX]

I'd have done the same damned thing. That kid was a moron.

What part of realizing he had a problem and trying to take steps to correct it by going to someone he loves, someone who is suppose to protect and guide him, makes him a moron?

[Lunacie]

I've been agreeing with you. I don't think the father should've done it. I understand possible motivations, but I don't agree with them.

And back to the actual topic, I feel sorry for the girl, here she is, maybe having been abused, maybe not. Either way, her older brother is dead and her dad is in jail. And her dad is the type of person who would strip his own son and shoot him. Not a great recipe for a good home life. And the mom, I mean, how bad does she have to feel knowing that what she told her husband, the man she swore to love forever and blah blah blah, got her son killed.

Didn't I read that they were divorced, that he was remarried and the little girl who was supposedly molested was the boy's half sister? As I understood it, the boy told his mom about his concerns, not his step-mom, and she then called the dad who came over to the house where the boy actually lives with her.

[Kraheera]

I've been agreeing with you. I don't think the father should've done it. I understand possible motivations, but I don't agree with them.

And back to the actual topic, I feel sorry for the girl, here she is, maybe having been abused, maybe not. Either way, her older brother is dead and her dad is in jail. And her dad is the type of person who would strip his own son and shoot him. Not a great recipe for a good home life. And the mom, I mean, how bad does she have to feel knowing that what she told her husband, the man she swore to love forever and blah blah blah, got her son killed.


Oh, I know you have. this thread just really bothered me. I didn't see some of my fellow MW'rs as being so... soo... GAH!

You know what I mean.

[ShadowcatX]

Oh, I know you have. this thread just really bothered me. I didn't see some of my fellow MW'rs as being so... soo... GAH!

You know what I mean.

Yeah, I get you. But also remember, they're not intentionally being mean, everyone has their own life experiences, everyone has their own baggage, they just see things a different way because of that.

[TuathaSidhe]

http://www.paganforum.com/Smileys/custom/sorry1.gif (javascript:void(0);) You're both right. I must have had a "blonde moment" earlier. Yeah, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. :hahugh:

thats my story and im not even blonde..so your story is safe :hahugh:

[Kraheera]

Yeah, I get you. But also remember, they're not intentionally being mean, everyone has their own life experiences, everyone has their own baggage, they just see things a different way because of that.


I get that. I do. It's just one of my pet peeves when people won't look at logic. Either look at the logic presented, or admit that you can't due to experience and step aside.

Kind of like how I refuse to give advice to people about how to deal with emotionally abusive parents. I have horrid experiences in that direction, so I refuse to give advice, because it would immediately be "Dump the parent on the curb.".. and I know that isn't always the best answer.

[Lunacie]

I get that. I do. It's just one of my pet peeves when people won't look at logic. Either look at the logic presented, or admit that you can't due to experience and step aside.

Kind of like how I refuse to give advice to people about how to deal with emotionally abusive parents. I have horrid experiences in that direction, so I refuse to give advice, because it would immediately be "Dump the parent on the curb.".. and I know that isn't always the best answer.

Forget where I read this, but it really clicked with me . . . "Logic is a systematic method of coming to the wrong conclusion with confidence." :lol:

For myself, I try to balance the two, logic and emotion. I figure we have both of them for some reason, eh?

[memnoch]

I would say inappropriate touching, manual stimulation, oral stimulation, etc. qualifies as "molestation". I think "penetration" would fall under "rape".

pretty much agree but feel that rape also is molestation as well...here is the legal definition

molestation n. the crime of sexual acts with children up to the age of 18, including touching of private parts, exposure of genitalia, taking of pornographic pictures, rape, inducement of sexual acts with the molester or with other children, and variations of these acts by pedophiles. Molestation also applies to incest by a relative with a minor family member, and any unwanted sexual acts with adults short of rape.

[Cunae]

I wouldn't trust them with my theoretical children right now, either. However, that's a far cry from saying they should be killed off. That attitude, the kill 'em off one, can keep the people who have that attraction from talking about it, from getting help for it, and prevent it from being studied.


I was being intense on purpose, just to illustrate my disgust and intolerance of these people.

I don't think logic applies to pedophiles. They defy logic and our treatment abilities. It's wishful thinking! Pedophilia is such a drive, such a perverse desire, that treatment doesn't work and children will eventually be harmed. It happens over and over again! I want to protect future victims--not create more. Not even one more.

I want to scream when I see in the local paper the names and addresses of released sex offenders who are "high risk, likely to reoffend". Many are child molestors. WTF?? Is that logic, tolerance and justice at play? To me, it's just releasing the predator into a community chock full of prey. Shame on the system.

Psycho babble all you want... is an effort to be tolerant worth the price?


OK, I am done ranting because I'm being accused of being illogical, but that's often how victims are... and I think there's very little room for the "logic" of treatment adovocates on the matter.

[Infinite Grey]

Psycho babble all you want... is an effort to be tolerant worth the price?


And there it is. We could try an exorcism, how about that?

[ShadowcatX]

I don't think logic applies to pedophiles. They defy logic and our treatment abilities.

Because their condition isn't studied because people would rather say they're hopeless, evil, and should just be killed. I mean, if you had some issue that if you sought help for people would shun you, threaten you, and possibly kill you, even though you had done no wrong, would you seek help? Especially when such help is minimially effective atm?


It's wishful thinking! Pedophilia is such a drive, such a perverse desire, that treatment doesn't work and children will eventually be harmed. It happens over and over again! I want to protect future victims--not create more. Not even one more.

That isn't always true. And it could get better. Pedophilia is not some magical ailment that can never be fixed. It's simply an ailment that hasn't been studied in depth.

[ShadowcatX]

For myself, I try to balance the two, logic and emotion. I figure we have both of them for some reason, eh?

Normally, I try and balance the two. Situations like this, to me, are an exception where logic should prevail simply because it is so emotionally charged.

[Lunacie]

Normally, I try and balance the two. Situations like this, to me, are an exception where logic should prevail simply because it is so emotionally charged.

Balance doesn't always mean the scales are hanging from Lady Justice's hands at the same level. Sometimes it means one is higher than the other, and then the other one is higher. It's a delicate balancing act, not some pressure that forces them both into some perceived equality.

[Corvis Canis Latrans]

pretty much agree but feel that rape also is molestation as well...here is the legal definition

molestation n. the crime of sexual acts with children up to the age of 18, including touching of private parts, exposure of genitalia, taking of pornographic pictures, rape, inducement of sexual acts with the molester or with other children, and variations of these acts by pedophiles. Molestation also applies to incest by a relative with a minor family member, and any unwanted sexual acts with adults short of rape.

And then to continue: What constitutes a sexual act versus a gesture of affection?

Is, for example, using my own aforementioned experiences, a wet kiss considered molestation?

Is, for example, a child threatening to kiss (complete with approaching them, lips puckered) another child in order to get the other child to leave them alone considered molestation?

Is a child or adolescent not understanding boundaries (or rather, operating under a different family assumption about appropriate boundaries and hugging), poking at and hugging another child, considered to have molested that child?

[Cunae]

And there it is. We could try an exorcism, how about that?


Not sure where you get that nutty idea. Oh yeah, sarcasm. I get it.

[Corvis Canis Latrans]

Kudos to SS and Memnoch for having the courage to answer my first question.

Somehow I'm not surprised that most of the people I've watched show up at the bottom of the page as reading this thread since I posted seem collectively afraid to answer either that question or the second. I know that some of you haven't had a chance to read yet, but since I'm leaving for the thanksgiving week soon, I'm jumping to the punchline.

I imagine it's because you all know where I'm going with it, and you don't have the courage to be the ones to confess that there is a blurry area that a kid, even a 15 year old might not understand, that there are answers to the question of "What is molestation?" that not even adults have an agreed upon answer for.

[Lunacie]

And then to continue: What constitutes a sexual act versus a gesture of affection?

Is, for example, using my own aforementioned experiences, a wet kiss considered molestation?

Is, for example, a child threatening to kiss (complete with approaching them, lips puckered) another child in order to get the other child to leave them alone considered molestation?

Is a child or adolescent not understanding boundaries (or rather, operating under a different family assumption about appropriate boundaries and hugging), poking at and hugging another child, considered to have molested that child?

Are these the questions you'd really like to have opinions on?

Things have been rather chaotic at my house this morning (no school), so I couldn't take the time earlier to figure out my own opinion on what actually consitutes molestation versus simply not being aware of boundaries or versus using those tactics to get another person to leave one alone.

I did a quick google and the first site that comes up is in reference to California law - I don't know if there is any difference in such laws between various states or what those differences might be. But this site says...


In California, most child molestation and abuse cases are charged under Penal Code Sections 288(a) and 288.5(a). Section 288(a) states that any person who commits a lewd or lascivious act on a child under the age of 14 is guilty of a felony punishable in the state prison for 3 to 8 years. Each act on a child constitutes one charge. Section 288.5(a) states that any person who engages in 3 or more acts of substantial sexual conduct with a child under the age of 14 or 3 or more acts of lewd and lascivious conduct is guilty of continuous sexual abuse on a child. This crime is also a felony and is punishable from 6 to 16 years. The law defines lewd and lascivious act as any touching of the body of a child under the age of 14 with the specific intent to arouse, appeal to, or gratify the sexual desires of either party.
from here (http://www.williamweinberg.com/lawyer-attorney-1127628.html)

In that case, only the first of your questions (wet kisses) would possibly qualify as molestation - depending on the intent. I don't know how difficult it would be to establish intent. I know most toddlers begin by giving wet kisses and are taught by words and/or reactions that they aren't welcome.

Someone who is using "ickey smooches" or other such ploys to get another child to leave them alone is not doing that for sexual gratification, so that would probably not be considered molestation, not a felony.

In the case of someone who doesn't understand boundaries and pokes, hugs or kisses someone inappropriately a social worker or judge might recommend some therapy rather than charging them with a felony.

In any of those cases, unless the person doing the kissing, poking, hugging, or whatever is over the age of 14, I expect therapy or a short amount of time in juvvie would be recommended rather than calling it a felony molestation.

[ShadowcatX]

Not sure where you get that nutty idea. Oh yeah, sarcasm. I get it.

You're dismissing science as "psychobabble". The majority who do that do it in favor of religion.

[Corvis Canis Latrans]

Are these the questions you'd really like to have opinions on?

Things have been rather chaotic at my house this morning (no school), so I couldn't take the time earlier to figure out my own opinion on what actually consitutes molestation versus simply not being aware of boundaries or versus using those tactics to get another person to leave one alone.

*Nods*

That post was more to prod a response from people because I'm leaving soon and I'm genuinely curious. I figured some people were formulating their own responses or just waiting to see what other people might say, but since I won't be seeing the internet for a week I wanted to give things a push.


In that case, only the first of your questions (wet kisses) would possibly qualify as molestation - depending on the intent. I don't know how difficult it would be to establish intent. I know most toddlers begin by giving wet kisses and are taught by words and/or reactions that they aren't welcome.

If that's the case, then legally my grandma could have been guilty of molestation, since I made repeatedly clear that slobbery kisses grossed me out.




Someone who is using "ickey smooches" or other such ploys to get another child to leave them alone is not doing that for sexual gratification, so that would probably not be considered molestation, not a felony.

Though by zero-tolerance rules there have been a few instances of children being suspended or worse for not knowing those boundaries at age 5 or 6 (stupid on the part of the school). In my case, that was before zero tolerance policies came about and I don't recall even being told on, but I was (I think) 11-12....maybe younger since it was at my old school...


In the case of someone who doesn't understand boundaries and pokes, hugs or kisses someone inappropriately a social worker or judge might recommend some therapy rather than charging them with a felony.

In any of those cases, unless the person doing the kissing, poking, hugging, or whatever is over the age of 14, I expect therapy or a short amount of time in juvvie would be recommended rather than calling it a felony molestation.

Exactly. What I'm asking is that definitionally speaking, there are things that are on a boundary.

I consider what my grandma did to be gross, to this day I don't think it was right (a lot of times a child's complaints are automatically discredited even when they're genuinely uncomfortable), but I know she wasn't molesting me.

But to revisit my comment earlier...wet kisses, while not particularly liked, weren't considered out of the ordinary on that side of the family. I was brought up thinking they were normal, well into adolescence. What kept me from using them was the fact that I personally considered them gross.

But what if I had found it acceptable and kissed in that manner another family member on the other side of the family?

What if, in that scenario they got grossed out and told me I'd done something wrong? What if a friend told me the same thing?

What if I believed it, thought I'd done something horrible, and just blurted out to my parents that I'd molested someone?

See the thing that bothers me about these articles are how vague they are, as other people have pointed out.

The boy confessed to molesting his half sister.

Well, what did he consider, or what behavior was he led to consider to be molestation?

Did a friend with different standards get grossed out by what they considered an overly affectionate hug? Scare the boy into thinking he'd done something awful and unnatural?

Kids are like this. At that age they are just learning about certain types of boundaries, and that different people differ on what they consider those boundaries to be.

Just a reading of Dear Abby will reflect how different those norms are even in adults. Recently there was a letter written by a person who was disturbed at the relationship between her friend and her friend's adolescent son, who hugged his mother frequently and was in general extremely affectionate toward his mother. The person who wrote to Dear Abby thought there must be something illicit or unnatural going on or that her friend was taking bonding with her son too far...

"Abby" sided with the mother and son.

One family's "molestation" or abnormal relationship is another family's gesture of affection.

Until we know what the boy thought might be molestation, we can't really assume that by our standards he did anything wrong, since "molestation" can have such different assumptions behind it from person to person.

CCL

[Lunacie]

I was being intense on purpose, just to illustrate my disgust and intolerance of these people.

I don't think logic applies to pedophiles. They defy logic and our treatment abilities. It's wishful thinking! Pedophilia is such a drive, such a perverse desire, that treatment doesn't work and children will eventually be harmed. It happens over and over again! I want to protect future victims--not create more. Not even one more.

I want to scream when I see in the local paper the names and addresses of released sex offenders who are "high risk, likely to reoffend". Many are child molestors. WTF?? Is that logic, tolerance and justice at play? To me, it's just releasing the predator into a community chock full of prey. Shame on the system.

Psycho babble all you want... is an effort to be tolerant worth the price?


OK, I am done ranting because I'm being accused of being illogical, but that's often how victims are... and I think there's very little room for the "logic" of treatment adovocates on the matter.

Some of the posters have been trying to explain that it's our treatment abilities that are failing to provide the answers, not that the pedophiles are forever beyond any treatment. We used to lock our "mentally retarded" children away in the attic, now we send them to school. Our ability to provide treatment has improved.

Hopefully in the future we will learn how to provide better treatment for those who are afflicted with a desire for underage children.

[Corvis Canis Latrans]

Some of the posters have been trying to explain that it's our treatment abilities that are failing to provide the answers, not that the pedophiles are forever beyond any treatment. We used to lock our "mentally retarded" children away in the attic, now we send them to school. Our ability to provide treatment has improved.

Hopefully in the future we will learn how to provide better treatment for those who are afflicted with a desire for underage children.

Well said, as well.

MC, read up on the history of treatment of Schizophrenia, or for that matter autism or aspergers and see how much the treatment and mindset has changed over the years.

Thirty years ago the majority of childhood autists were institutionalized. Now most of them are able to be somewhat integrated, and some (particularly if you consider aspergers a form of autism) become fully functioning members of society.

Everything you say about child molesters being untreatable was the same thing that was said of autistics even a few decades ago, and has been found to be rather false.

But only because there wasn't the same stigma attached to autism and because a few autists managed to reach beyond their disabilities and speak out. Temple Grandin being the primary example.

[ShadowcatX]

Some of the posters have been trying to explain that it's our treatment abilities that are failing to provide the answers, not that the pedophiles are forever beyond any treatment. We used to lock our "mentally retarded" children away in the attic, now we send them to school. Our ability to provide treatment has improved.

Hopefully in the future we will learn how to provide better treatment for those who are afflicted with a desire for underage children.

+1

[Cunae]

You're dismissing science as "psychobabble". The majority who do that do it in favor of religion.


My use of the term psycho-babble comes from my conservative background not my religious background. And I use the term loosely... only applicable to some of the posts in this thread. I hardly dismiss psychiatry in favor of prayer and healings or whatever was meant.

[Sequoia]

I don't think logic applies to pedophiles. They defy logic and our treatment abilities. It's wishful thinking! Pedophilia is such a drive, such a perverse desire, that treatment doesn't work and children will eventually be harmed.

Whoah there. Only a pedophile can know what a pedophile thinks, MC. So unless you have some serious self-hate going on, knock off the assumptions already.

You're arguing that these people inevitably harm others. That's simply not true. It is as though you're arguing that if a man was to see a woman naked, he would just have to stop what he was doing and rape her. Why? Well, he has this perverse desire to have sex with the opposite sex (assuming he's straight or bisexual), and there she was.

You DO realize that not all men or women have sex when they "desire" it, right?

A pedophile who ACTS on this "desire" is a criminal. One who does NOT, never does, is NOT a criminal. He or she has done nothing wrong. Period.


I want to scream when I see in the local paper the names and addresses of released sex offenders who are "high risk, likely to reoffend". Many are child molestors. WTF?? Is that logic, tolerance and justice at play? To me, it's just releasing the predator into a community chock full of prey. Shame on the system.

And that, MC, is something completely different. A convicted rapist or convicted molester is completely different than some pitiful soul who found themselves attracted to children and refused to act on it due to their morals.

A convicted criminal like that should NEVER be released.

But we're talking about people who have done nothing more than "think" something you find distasteful. They have done absolutely nothing wrong. If you're going to kill people for their thoughts, you're going to have to kill a lot more people. Probably even people you know. Because why stop at pedophilia?


Psycho babble all you want... is an effort to be tolerant worth the price?

Um, yeah. Yeah it is, MC. Because we're "psychobabbling" about individuals who have never acted criminally. You can't just go about, killing whomever you *suspect* has had naughty thoughts.


OK, I am done ranting because I'm being accused of being illogical, but that's often how victims are... and I think there's very little room for the "logic" of treatment adovocates on the matter.

You are being illogical. You're arguing that we kill people because of how they think. What's next, people who don't have the same political views as you? They aren't forcing you to do what they say... YET. But one day, they may rise up and say something you really don't like!!! So we should kill them right now, before they upset you.

[Wolfpoet]

Whoah there. Only a pedophile can know what a pedophile thinks, MC. So unless you have some serious self-hate going on, knock off the assumptions already.

You're arguing that these people inevitably harm others. That's simply not true. It is as though you're arguing that if a man was to see a woman naked, he would just have to stop what he was doing and rape her. Why? Well, he has this perverse desire to have sex with the opposite sex (assuming he's straight or bisexual), and there she was.

You DO realize that not all men or women have sex when they "desire" it, right?

A pedophile who ACTS on this "desire" is a criminal. One who does NOT, never does, is NOT a criminal. He or she has done nothing wrong. Period.



And that, MC, is something completely different. A convicted rapist or convicted molester is completely different than some pitiful soul who found themselves attracted to children and refused to act on it due to their morals.

A convicted criminal like that should NEVER be released.

But we're talking about people who have done nothing more than "think" something you find distasteful. They have done absolutely nothing wrong. If you're going to kill people for their thoughts, you're going to have to kill a lot more people. Probably even people you know. Because why stop at pedophilia?



Um, yeah. Yeah it is, MC. Because we're "psychobabbling" about individuals who have never acted criminally. You can't just go about, killing whomever you *suspect* has had naughty thoughts.



You are being illogical. You're arguing that we kill people because of how they think. What's next, people who don't have the same political views as you? They aren't forcing you to do what they say... YET. But one day, they may rise up and say something you really don't like!!! So we should kill them right now, before they upset you.

Reading this made me actualy think.

[swapmeetmomma]

I dont know if anyone else here said this but, He was 15. I knew right and wrong when I was 15, but anyway yes he is a minor, but no he is not a child, and I see alot of posts where people are defending him like he is a small chilld.

[Wolfpoet]

I dont know if anyone else here said this but, He was 15. I knew right and wrong when I was 15, but anyway yes he is a minor, but no he is not a child, and I see alot of posts where people are defending him like he is a small chilld.

What gets me is the amount of people who have accepted, at face value, the view this kid is a peadophile.

The only witness to his 'confession' is the guy who forced the kid to strip naked before shooting him.

[aranarose]

I dont know if anyone else here said this but, He was 15. I knew right and wrong when I was 15, but anyway yes he is a minor, but no he is not a child, and I see alot of posts where people are defending him like he is a small chilld.

That's ALL we know about him is that he WAS a 15 year old kid. We don't know much else about him. We don't know if he had developmental issues or learning disabilities, which can greatly affect the judgment of a person of any age. With certain learning disabilities, a 15-year-old could have the judgment of a 7-year-old.

In fact, I just read the article again. He was a junior high school student. I don't know about you, but when I was 15, I was a sophomore in HIGH SCHOOL. Which means he's at LEAST two years behind where he should be as far as school goes. Learning delays are very often accompanied by emotional development delays.

We also don't know WHAT it was that he confessed to. All we know is that he told his mother he'd done something with his sister that was inappropriate. It could be ANYTHING.

The mother called the father, telling him that this was something that needed to be dealt with. "We don't sweep this under the rug," or something to that effect was the quote in the article.

In other words, she was trying to get her son the help that he was trying to ask for.

I don't care what age a person is. If they come asking for help, you find a way to help them. You don't sexually humiliate them and then kill them.

[Lunacie]

Just to throw a monkey wrench into the point you're making, aranarose, it may depend on whether it's a 3-year high school or a 4-year high school. Middle school/junior high also comes in 2-year and 3-year versions. So he might be only a year behind where most are at his age. Could be he repeated first grade, could be his parents waited a year to even start him in school. Doesn't necessarily mean he's developmentally challenged, although it doesn't mean he isn't either.

Especially since one of my first thoughts in reading about this tragedy was that kids with emotional development issues often blame themselves for things that other kids simply shrug off, if they even give it any thought in the first place.

And the old saying of "The apple never falls far from the tree" could apply in this case as well. If the father has some emotional immaturity issues he might over-react. There is so much about this situation that the media won't ever find newsworthy. :whatgives

[aranarose]

Just to throw a monkey wrench into the point you're making, aranarose, it may depend on whether it's a 3-year high school or a 4-year high school. Middle school/junior high also comes in 2-year and 3-year versions. So he might be only a year behind where most are at his age. Could be he repeated first grade, could be his parents waited a year to even start him in school. Doesn't necessarily mean he's developmentally challenged, although it doesn't mean he isn't either.

Especially since one of my first thoughts in reading about this tragedy was that kids with emotional development issues often blame themselves for things that other kids simply shrug off, if they even give it any thought in the first place.

And the old saying of "The apple never falls far from the tree" could apply in this case as well. If the father has some emotional immaturity issues he might over-react. There is so much about this situation that the media won't ever find newsworthy. :whatgives

I just reread the article yet again. He's in high school, I'd read it wrong initially.

Of course that doesn't mean he doesn't have emotional developmental issues.

The only thing that I've seen about what he did was a very brief mention of him lying down on top of the three year old in another article (here (http://www.bvblackspin.com/2009/11/19/jamar-pinkney-sr-shoots-his-son-in-the-head-execution-style/))

No penetration, and no word as to what his intentions were.

Regardless, the father vastly overreacted to a boy reaching out for help.

[ShadowcatX]

What gets me is the amount of people who have accepted, at face value, the view this kid is a peadophile.

The only witness to his 'confession' is the guy who forced the kid to strip naked before shooting him.

The discussion isn't just about him anymore, its grown. But the point is we're allowing people to say he's a pedophile, so that we can point say that even pedophiles can and do seek help sometimes.

[ShadowcatX]

My use of the term psycho-babble comes from my conservative background not my religious background. And I use the term loosely... only applicable to some of the posts in this thread. I hardly dismiss psychiatry in favor of prayer and healings or whatever was meant.

Right. . .because everyone who uses the term psychobabble thinks psychiatry is great. Rather you dismiss it in favor of prayer and healings, or in favor of our right torture, you're dismissing a legit branch of science.

That said, what specifically in this thread is psychobabble?

[Sequoia]

My use of the term psycho-babble comes from my conservative background not my religious background. And I use the term loosely... only applicable to some of the posts in this thread. I hardly dismiss psychiatry in favor of prayer and healings or whatever was meant.

But you'd dismiss psychiatry in favor of just... you know... killing the "yucky" ones.

[Laisrean]

What gets me is the amount of people who have accepted, at face value, the view this kid is a peadophile.

The only witness to his 'confession' is the guy who forced the kid to strip naked before shooting him.

Actually, his confession was to his mother and then she informed the father of it, and that is when he went berserk.

[Laisrean]

Most pedophiles seem to be repeat offenders. If he did it once, odds are he would do it again. I don't think there is anyone who really thinks his father murdering him was the right thing to do, though. I think the most anyone is saying is that they understand why his father would be pissed off, so they can understand his motives... but we don't agree with the action of committing murder.

[aranarose]

Actually, his confession was to his mother and then she informed the father of it, and that is when he went berserk.

Berserk my ass. The father wasn't even THERE when the mother called and told him. Yes, that's right, she CALLED him and told him. Which means he had the time to get up, get in his car, drive across town, and then beat his son, make him strip, drag him outside, and shoot him in front of multiple family members, some of whom even tried to stop him.

This was not the reaction of a man who simply lost it and wasn't thinking clearly. This was calculated and planned.

[Kraheera]

Berserk my ass. The father wasn't even THERE when the mother called and told him. Yes, that's right, she CALLED him and told him. Which means he had the time to get up, get in his car, drive across town, and then beat his son, make him strip, drag him outside, and shoot him in front of multiple family members, some of whom even tried to stop him.

This was not the reaction of a man who simply lost it and wasn't thinking clearly. This was calculated and planned.


This. He had TIME to think about it. I will be among the first to say that in anger, someone might do something rash and irrevocable. But there was just TOO much time between the phone call and when the boy died.

Not to mention the strip naked thing. That's just WAY off base.

[ShadowcatX]

Most pedophiles seem to be repeat offenders. If he did it once, odds are he would do it again. I don't think there is anyone who really thinks his father murdering him was the right thing to do, though. I think the most anyone is saying is that they understand why his father would be pissed off, so they can understand his motives... but we don't agree with the action of committing murder.

Most pedophiles don't go to the mother of their victim and ask her if what they did was inappropriate. The moment he asked for help he stopped being "most pedophiles" regardless of rather he did abuse her or not.

Don't get me wrong, if he hurt her, he should've been prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

That said, I understand the father's potential motives. I don't think they were his motives. Someone, earlier, said that this sounds like a "you hurt my property" killing. I agree.

[Terra Mater]

I like how you know what people will do, even without knowing them. That takes talent!
Actually, all it takes is having almost been there. Two years ago my schizophrenic daughter accused her older brother of having raped her. Had he been in the house at the time I might well have killed him myself in the rush of emotions I felt.

Its the difference between armchair quarterbacking and having walked in similar shoes. Be thankful you have the luxury of the former, because from experience I can assure you that no parent ever wants to have faced the latter.

You can disagree all you like. However, unless you have been there, your disagreement means nothing to me because you do not know, you are only guessing. You are trying to describe a dark color that you haven't seen to someone who has had the color splashed all over them.

[Kraheera]

Actually, all it takes is having almost been there. Two years ago my schizophrenic daughter accused her older brother of having raped her. Had he been in the house at the time I might well have killed him myself in the rush of emotions I felt.

Its the difference between armchair quarterbacking and having walked in similar shoes. Be thankful you have the luxury of the former, because from experience I can assure you that no parent ever wants to have faced the latter.

You can disagree all you like. However, unless you have been there, your disagreement means nothing to me because you do not know, you are only guessing. You are trying to describe a dark color that you haven't seen to someone who has had the color splashed all over them.


But that is exactly it. he wasn't there, and you had time to digest the news. You DIDN'T get up, drive to where he was, drag him outside, strip him down, and shoot him in the back of hte head.

Even if you may have wanted to do most of that at the time you heard it. Sorry you had to go through something like that, Terra. I don't envy you that.

[swapmeetmomma]

There are different types of pedophiles just like there are different types of murderers. Some have no remorse, some do, some feel guilt, some do. now IF he did it, then obviously he knew it was wrong and he needed help.

Okay as far as what I think about the Dad driving across town or whatever, I dont know about anyone else, but I have had some intense stuff happen to me in which I was in severe emotional distress for HOURS. I am convinced that he never "cooled down". He wanted to kill the poor kid immediately, and im sure the more he thought about what the boy could of done the more upset he became.

[Laisrean]

I agree. I can get pissed off and remain in that state for hours. It takes extraordinary circumstances for that to happen, but this is definitely an extraordinary circumstance. I don't know about others, but if I get pissed off it doesn't necessarily fade away in only 5 minutes...

[Sequoia]

I agree. I can get pissed off and remain in that state for hours. It takes extraordinary circumstances for that to happen, but this is definitely an extraordinary circumstance. I don't know about others, but if I get pissed off it doesn't necessarily fade away in only 5 minutes...

That still does not excuse the SLAUGHTER of a boy.

[swapmeetmomma]

Im saying if the kid did it. and ya its called a crime of passion.

[Æon Flux]

This is what I have heard so far:
1. There was no physical sign of abuse
2. There is no official conclusion that the boy "molested" his sister
3. He had, according to his mother, gone to her and he said he knew it was wrong of him to lay down on top of his sister.
4. As far as anyone knows the sister was not hurt, he didn't rape her or anything like that, he approached his mother, seeking help for something he knew was wrong...

This might not even have been sexual in nature for all we know.

The only facts here is that this boys father humiliated him, threatened the rest of the family and then shot his own son "execution style"

[Cassie]

This is what I have heard so far:
1. There was no physical sign of abuse
2. There is no official conclusion that the boy "molested" his sister
3. He had, according to his mother, gone to her and he said he knew it was wrong of him to lay down on top of his sister.
4. As far as anyone knows the sister was not hurt, he didn't rape her or anything like that, he approached his mother, seeking help for something he knew was wrong...

This might not even have been sexual in nature for all we know.

The only facts here is that this boys father humiliated him, threatened the rest of the family and then shot his own son "execution style"
:thumbsup: QFT!

[ShadowcatX]

This is what I have heard so far:
1. There was no physical sign of abuse
2. There is no official conclusion that the boy "molested" his sister
3. He had, according to his mother, gone to her and he said he knew it was wrong of him to lay down on top of his sister.
4. As far as anyone knows the sister was not hurt, he didn't rape her or anything like that, he approached his mother, seeking help for something he knew was wrong...

This might not even have been sexual in nature for all we know.

The only facts here is that this boys father humiliated him, threatened the rest of the family and then shot his own son "execution style"

He didn't just humiliate him, he dehumanized him (humans wear clothing, animals don't), he robbed him of his dignity (teach a kid that being naked in public is bad, then force that situation on him), and then when he was done, he put a bullet in his brain the way some people take out the trash.

When a person kills in anger they will often go over board, shooting 5 times what one will do. They may even torture first. Dehumanizing, robbing him of dignity, then executing him, isn't something someone in an "our of their mind" rage would do.

[Cunae]

Right. . .because everyone who uses the term psychobabble thinks psychiatry is great. Rather you dismiss it in favor of prayer and healings, or in favor of our right torture, you're dismissing a legit branch of science.

That said, what specifically in this thread is psychobabble?

I see a psychiatrist for depression, so I very much respect the science... I am saying it's faulty. Also, catch my message. I said I DO NOT favor prayer and healings for these people.

Read through the thread and you will see the posts I refer to as psycho-babble. I am talking specifically about those saying someone with child raping fantasies can be treated and then trusted around children because all they have are fantasies (or <shudder> "tendencies")

[sarabethv]

Actually, all it takes is having almost been there. Two years ago my schizophrenic daughter accused her older brother of having raped her. Had he been in the house at the time I might well have killed him myself in the rush of emotions I felt.

Its the difference between armchair quarterbacking and having walked in similar shoes. Be thankful you have the luxury of the former, because from experience I can assure you that no parent ever wants to have faced the latter.

You can disagree all you like. However, unless you have been there, your disagreement means nothing to me because you do not know, you are only guessing. You are trying to describe a dark color that you haven't seen to someone who has had the color splashed all over them.

I been there and I disagree. My Mom been there and (if she were alive) SHE would disagree. BTW I assume you did NOT murder your son. Believe me, my sympathies are with you, having a child with mental illness is not easy, and then having a situation like you describe is horrible. I admire you in many ways Terra (and by the way enjoyed lunch with you), but a strong emotional hit like this one, does not excuse acting as this man did.

This wasn't a crime of passion or temporary insanity. IF he had questioned the boy and the boy had confessed he raped his little sister and the father then shot him well ........then I could agree with you folks that it was just a tragic situation. However, marching your kid outdoors, making him strip, then killing him execution style indicates premeditation, and the intent to humiliate and murder.

From what little we know, it seems that the infraction was relatively minor and certainly not deserving of a death sentence.

I feel really bad for the mother too. Imagine trying to inform your ex of something you felt had to be dealt with, and his response was to execute your child.

[Stormwt]

I feel really bad for the mother too. Imagine trying to inform your ex of something you felt had to be dealt with, and his response was to execute your child.

This was one of my first thoughts. And how will the little girl feel when she is old enough to understand what happened?

No matter what the reasons and who was right or who was wrong, nobody came out of this situation better off and more than one life has been ruined.

[memnoch]

That still does not excuse the SLAUGHTER of a boy.

I've not seen Lais say it was excusable, only understandable, which is my position as well.

[sarabethv]

I've not seen Lais say it was excusable, only understandable, which is my position as well.

Ah Mem, you are so understanding. You are most definitely getting all warm and fuzzy on us. <teasing>:toofless:

[memnoch]

Whoah there. Only a pedophile can know what a pedophile thinks, MC. So unless you have some serious self-hate going on, knock off the assumptions already.

You're arguing that these people inevitably harm others. That's simply not true. It is as though you're arguing that if a man was to see a woman naked, he would just have to stop what he was doing and rape her. Why? Well, he has this perverse desire to have sex with the opposite sex (assuming he's straight or bisexual), and there she was.

You DO realize that not all men or women have sex when they "desire" it, right?

A pedophile who ACTS on this "desire" is a criminal. One who does NOT, never does, is NOT a criminal. He or she has done nothing wrong. Period.



And that, MC, is something completely different. A convicted rapist or convicted molester is completely different than some pitiful soul who found themselves attracted to children and refused to act on it due to their morals.

A convicted criminal like that should NEVER be released.

But we're talking about people who have done nothing more than "think" something you find distasteful. They have done absolutely nothing wrong. If you're going to kill people for their thoughts, you're going to have to kill a lot more people. Probably even people you know. Because why stop at pedophilia?



Um, yeah. Yeah it is, MC. Because we're "psychobabbling" about individuals who have never acted criminally. You can't just go about, killing whomever you *suspect* has had naughty thoughts.



You are being illogical. You're arguing that we kill people because of how they think. What's next, people who don't have the same political views as you? They aren't forcing you to do what they say... YET. But one day, they may rise up and say something you really don't like!!! So we should kill them right now, before they upset you.

I agree with this fully, there is a world of difference in those who are pedophiles and those who commit crimes related to childrens sexuality. My personal opinion is that if society as a whole understood this the world would be shocked by the number of and types of people who would admit to having those thoughts.

I could be wrong though

[memnoch]

Ah Mem, you are so understanding. You are most definitely getting all warm and fuzzy on us. <teasing>:toofless:

I understand many things, and find most of them horrible and wrong :p

[memnoch]

This was one of my first thoughts. And how will the little girl feel when she is old enough to understand what happened?

No matter what the reasons and who was right or who was wrong, nobody came out of this situation better off and more than one life has been ruined.

IF this boy did molest her in any way, as he presumably claimed he did, nobody would have came out of this situation better off, and more than one life would have been ruined.

[Cunae]

To clarify... I am coming from the position of a child who was molested for several years. Of course I hate pedophiles. Of course I'd like to see those who rape children shot, but I understand that prison is how we deal with them and I accept as much. Everyone stop it with the crap that I want people with naughty thoughts and differing opinions shot, too. Just because I am a Christian doesn't mean I am a crusader. I get tired of these bullshit accusations. I have a right to a strong opinion about things, too.

[Infinite Grey]

To clarify... I am coming from the position of a child who was molested for several years. Of course I hate pedophiles. Of course I'd like to see those who rape children shot, but I understand that prison is how we deal with them and I accept as much. Everyone stop it with the crap that I want people with naughty thoughts and differing opinions shot, too. Just because I am a Christian doesn't mean I am a crusader. I get tired of these bullshit accusations. I have a right to a strong opinion about things, too.

Yes you have the right to a "strong opinion about things, too" - but understand, people have an equal right to disagree and express why they disagree - especially when you make blanket statements with no evidence and is obviously based on emotion and personal bias.

[Cunae]

Yes you have the right to a "strong opinion about things, too" - but understand, people have an equal right to disagree and express why they disagree - especially when you make blanket statements with no evidence and is obviously based on emotion and personal bias.


Believe it or not, I agree with you.

[Sequoia]

Of course I hate pedophiles. Of course I'd like to see those who rape children shot,

And there you go, with your misunderstandings and poor logic again. Let me try to say this slowly. Not all pedophiles rape children. Or molest them. Or EVER act on their attraction. Just as you and I don't go around bouncing like bunnies with every person we see on the streets, pedophiles don't rape or molest every child they see. In fact, the vast majority of them never, EVER touch a child.


but I understand that prison is how we deal with them and I accept as much. Everyone stop it with the crap that I want people with naughty thoughts and differing opinions shot, too.

Well, when you act as though anyone who thinks bad things about children should be drawn and quartered, what are we left to think?


Just because I am a Christian doesn't mean I am a crusader. I get tired of these bullshit accusations. I have a right to a strong opinion about things, too.

MC, you have a healthy persecution complex. I wouldn't care if you were Pastafarian, if you came up with these illogical, emotion-based "arguments" regarding such things, I'd tell-it-like-I-see-it just the same. No-one here has called you a crusader.

[ShadowcatX]

I see a psychiatrist for depression, so I very much respect the science... I am saying it's faulty. Also, catch my message. I said I DO NOT favor prayer and healings for these people.

Read through the thread and you will see the posts I refer to as psycho-babble. I am talking specifically about those saying someone with child raping fantasies can be treated and then trusted around children because all they have are fantasies (or <shudder> "tendencies")

I have fantasies (or tendencies) about goth chicks. Should I not be trusted around anyone whose goth?

Right now, pedophilia treatments are lousy, at best. It doesn't have to stay that way. If pedophiles would come forward and let us study them and let us figure out how to treat them, it would get better. However, as long as there are people who would condemn them for actions they haven't taken, they won't want to come forward.

[ShadowcatX]

In fact, the vast majority of them never, EVER touch a child.

Just to be annoying, I'd love to see proof of this. :hahugh:


MC, you have a healthy persecution complex. I wouldn't care if you were Pastafarian, if you came up with these illogical, emotion-based "arguments" regarding such things, I'd tell-it-like-I-see-it just the same. No-one here has called you a crusader.

Thank you. Personally, I don't give a shit what religion anyone is, science and religion can exist hand in hand.

[Cunae]

And there you go, with your misunderstandings and poor logic again. Let me try to say this slowly. Not all pedophiles rape children. Or molest them. Or EVER act on their attraction. Just as you and I don't go around bouncing like bunnies with every person we see on the streets, pedophiles don't rape or molest every child they see. In fact, the vast majority of them never, EVER touch a child.




And you know this how? (Am I asking that slowly enough?}

[Sequoia]

And you know this how? (Am I asking that slowly enough?}

Sigh.


According to Dr. Herbert Wagemaker (a pretty well known psychiatrist in that field of study), nearly 4% of the population in the US has tendencies towards children. Let's round that to a nice even number. 4% of 330,000,000 people is 13,200,000. So 13.2 million people in the US are attracted to children.

Did you even bother reading that?

And you didn't address my point - that just because you are attracted to somebody, doesn't mean that you'll RAPE THEM.

[Stormwt]

This was one of my first thoughts. And how will the little girl feel when she is old enough to understand what happened?

No matter what the reasons and who was right or who was wrong, nobody came out of this situation better off and more than one life has been ruined.

IF this boy did molest her in any way, as he presumably claimed he did, nobody would have came out of this situation better off, and more than one life would have been ruined.

Nobody knows if he actually did. He said he knew it was wrong to lie on top of her, that doesn't mean he molested her and we will never know if he did or if he ever would have.

If he did molest her or just had tendancies towards this behaviour, he had asked for help and therefore brought whatever the problem was to light. What would have happened after that and if lives would still have been ruined we can't say.

I wasn't speculating on what might have happened but commenting on what did happen

[Cassie]

I wonder how many people who have "inappropriate" thoughts or a tendency to "inappropriate" behavior will make a mental note of what happened in this case and decide it isn't worth the risk of seeking help? And I wonder how many children down the line will suffer as a result?

[LacyRoze]

I wonder how many people who have "inappropriate" thoughts or a tendency to "inappropriate" behavior will make a mental note of what happened in this case and decide it isn't worth the risk of seeking help? And I wonder how many children down the line will suffer as a result?


+1

[Æon Flux]

I wonder how many people who have "inappropriate" thoughts or a tendency to "inappropriate" behavior will make a mental note of what happened in this case and decide it isn't worth the risk of seeking help? And I wonder how many children down the line will suffer as a result?

Exactly. I think this is something most people seem to not realize.
There are plenty of people out there with "inappropriate tendencies" that will never get help before something bad happens because:
There is an extremely large risk that they will get killed.

Not only would these people seek help before anything happens but because of the lack of people who do so we have no idea if these things can, in fact, be prevented. All we know about is the cases where people have been tried and found either guilty or innocent.
In this day and age even an accusation of inappropriate behavior with children will get you cursed, ostracized and sometimes even killed no matter if the person is innocent, has been declared innocent or both.

[memnoch]

Nobody knows if he actually did. He said he knew it was wrong to lie on top of her, that doesn't mean he molested her and we will never know if he did or if he ever would have.

If he did molest her or just had tendancies towards this behaviour, he had asked for help and therefore brought whatever the problem was to light. What would have happened after that and if lives would still have been ruined we can't say.

I wasn't speculating on what might have happened but commenting on what did happen

You don't know exactly everything that was said, so as such you are commenting on what might have happened based on what little information is available.

[Cunae]

Sigh.



Did you even bother reading that?

And you didn't address my point - that just because you are attracted to somebody, doesn't mean that you'll RAPE THEM.

I did read it and I don't believe we can know for sure--for the victims, it's still the dirtiest secret around.

Because adults who sexually abuse children are repeat offenders, common sense tells us to keep these adults away from kids and out of our neighborhoods. Remember, given the opportunity, a male child abuser will have more than one victim. PS. Child abusers dont' call what they do, often lovingly, rape. Neither do their young targets.

[Æon Flux]

Because adults who sexually abuse children are repeat offenders, common sense tells us to keep these adults away from kids and out of our neighborhoods.

Next time you might want to phrase it "because adults who sexually abuse children are USUALLY repeat offenders".
There are people who don't re-offend. Some sexual abuse is due to drugs and alcohol, illness and such and when treatment is provided and completed those people never re-offend.

[Stormwt]

You don't know exactly everything that was said, so as such you are commenting on what might have happened based on what little information is available.

lol no - I commented on the fact that the father shot the boy. That did happen.