Man rapes woman at knife point, good samaritans deliver due beatdown

[CrAz3D]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5527818.html

That poor lady and ESPECIALLY those poor little kids that had to witness that.

[Krazed]

owned @ the rapist

[iago]

Wouldn't it be funny if it's the wrong guy?

They should have called the police instead, at least they'd confirm it was actually him before they took action..

[Newby]

I'm sadistic, and that's funny.

[CrAz3D]

Wouldn't it be funny if it's the wrong guy?

They should have called the police instead, at least they'd confirm it was actually him before they took action..

I'm thinking that they were totally sure that it was him. 


It's awesome that they caught up with hi,

[trust]

Wouldn't it be funny if it's the wrong guy?

They should have called the police instead, at least they'd confirm it was actually him before they took action..

You would say that. The article said that they started to fight in the apartment, how could it have been the wrong guy?

[iago]

You would say that.

Err... I would say that you shouldn't beat the shit out of people who may be innocent? Is that a bad thing?

In any case, I'd quickly skimmed the article and missed the part about it starting in the apartment. But still, there aren't really any details about it, so I couldn't say for sure.

In any case, I still think they should have held him down and called the police rather than applying mob justice.

[CrAz3D]

the woman ran outside to tell her boyfriend.
The boyfriend and some others confronted the suspect in the apartment, and a fight began.

The only thing in question is whether or not he actually raped her ... but with there being witnesses ... beat on, beat on.

[Sidoh]

You would say that. The article said that they started to fight in the apartment, how could it have been the wrong guy?

I wouldn't have any problem if they'd knocked him out during as to save the victim further suffering or after to keep him from getting away, but he was smashed in the face with a baseball bat and shot at least twice, according to the article.  That's excessive.  Taking the law into your own hands is dangerous, stupid and defeats the purpose of the legal and justice systems.

[Joe]

Now if he had only beat himself in the first place, he wouldn't have had to rape the chick, he wouldn't have gotten shot, and we wouldn't be critiquing him for not beating himself in the first place.

You would say that. The article said that they started to fight in the apartment, how could it have been the wrong guy?

I wouldn't have any problem if they'd knocked him out during as to save the victim further suffering or after to keep him from getting away, but he was smashed in the face with a baseball bat and shot at least twice, according to the article.  That's excessive.  Taking the law into your own hands is dangerous, stupid and defeats the purpose of the legal and justice systems.

If this happened more often we'd see a heck of a lot less repeat offenders.

[iago]

I wouldn't have any problem if they'd knocked him out during as to save the victim further suffering or after to keep him from getting away, but he was smashed in the face with a baseball bat and shot at least twice, according to the article.  That's excessive.  Taking the law into your own hands is dangerous, stupid and defeats the purpose of the legal and justice systems.

I agree. There's a big difference between restraint and assault.

If this happened more often we'd see a heck of a lot less repeat offenders.

We'd also see a whole lot more innocent people getting beat up and shot.

[CrAz3D]

Well, let's let the legal system take care of these assaulters, then.
I bet you'd have a hard time anywhere finding a jury to convict.

[iago]

Well, let's let the legal system take care of these assaulters, then.
I bet you'd have a hard time anywhere finding a jury to convict.

So what you just said is that your legal system doesn't convict people who break the law?

Sounds like it works great to me!

[Joe]

I like how Craz3d speaks in partial thoughts. Who's not getting convicted?

If I were a member of a jury, I'd find that the rapist was guilty, because, I mean.. he did rape the chick. For his penalty, though, I'd suggest him being labeled as a sexual predator, because that's what he is, and no more. I mean, the jailtime will be served in the hospital and the fine will be paid to the doctors.

If I were going for the dudes who beat him down, I'd shake a stern finger of justice at them and tell them not to do it again, then possibly suggest a week in jail and a $500 fine. It's not over-doing it, but a week in jail isn't something that anyone'd look forward to.

[Warrior]

I like how Craz3d speaks in partial thoughts. Who's not getting convicted?

If I were a member of a jury, I'd find that the rapist was guilty, because, I mean.. he did rape the chick. For his penalty, though, I'd suggest him being labeled as a sexual predator, because that's what he is, and no more. I mean, the jailtime will be served in the hospital and the fine will be paid to the doctors.

If I were going for the dudes who beat him down, I'd shake a stern finger of justice at them and tell them not to do it again, then possibly suggest a week in jail and a $500 fine. It's not over-doing it, but a week in jail isn't something that anyone'd look forward to.

You're suggesting giving the people who gave that asshole what he deserved more jail time than the guy who actually raped a woman?
I really hope you're never a member of any jury.

[CrAz3D]

I like how Craz3d speaks in partial thoughts. Who's not getting convicted?

If I were a member of a jury, I'd find that the rapist was guilty, because, I mean.. he did rape the chick. For his penalty, though, I'd suggest him being labeled as a sexual predator, because that's what he is, and no more. I mean, the jailtime will be served in the hospital and the fine will be paid to the doctors.

If I were going for the dudes who beat him down, I'd shake a stern finger of justice at them and tell them not to do it again, then possibly suggest a week in jail and a $500 fine. It's not over-doing it, but a week in jail isn't something that anyone'd look forward to.

I know Sidoh picks on me for not being able to guess out of thin air what a scientology "raid" is ... but you MUST know that I was talking about the people administering the beat down.
I talked about those people being tried in our legal system and then mentioned that you'd never find a jury to convict.

iago, juries don't always rule on strict legal reasons, sometimes they rule on what is right (morally, ethically, humanitarianly) and allow the do-gooders to walk because they did a fine service to society.



Joe, as for your illusion of justice, why shouldn't we prevent that man from raping again?  A week in jail is cushy at worst.  You get free food, TV, health care, etc.

[Sidoh]

I know Sidoh picks on me for not being able to guess out of thin air what a scientology "raid" is

I say you have limited inference skills (I'm seriously starting to believe that this is more true than I thought initially) because you failed to gain the necessary context of the subject at hand.  Go back a page or two and look at the photos.  Raid is the wrong word, as iago pointed out, but if you saw Newby's posts, I'd be shocked if you couldn't muster the background necessary to figure out what's going on.

[topaz~]

It is my opinion that a jury composed of your peers is intended to offset the inflexibility of the law. The law may or may not recognize various mitigating circumstances in a crime, such as murder, where society (the jury being a sample size of that population) would either condone or forgive the crime. This aspect of the court system, I find, is particularly effective, because the bureaucracy is too often slow to amend or create legislation that is consistent with ideas held by society as a whole.