Ceaseless Change Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 What decision are you asking me to hypothesise on exactly? That he's a child? Look at his birth certificate. The sentence? I didn't say he shouldn't have been jailed. I can't make an informed decision, because i'm not informed. Neither are you of course. But the one thing I DO know for sure is that he was not an adult, and is still not. And so if you are arguing he should be treated as if he was, I disagree, and the facts are on my side. Because he's not an adult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The youth is obviously insane. Should the sick be treated or punished? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceaseless Change Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 If punishment genuinely makes you less likely to offend, then it's a form of treatment. If it doesn't, then what is the point of it? If it doesn't make you less likely, surely it makes you more likely - does anyone really think there are any punishments that make no difference at all to re-offending? I don't. I think it's binary - and mostly weighted to "makes it worse"..... So with that said - should ANY criminal be treated or punished? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The term child is far too general a term for this age group. Legally they aren't adults, yeah we know that, but a five year old is also a child. There is all the difference in the world between a 15 year old and a 5 year old yet some of us want to use the same definition. This is of course manner from heaven for those who want to exploit the loose definition of 'child' to suggest he didn't know what he was doing. Its also mighty easy to criticise the decision when you don't have to come up with an alternative (again) exploiting the obvious point that we don't know all the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceaseless Change Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I'm not criticising the decision - I'm criticising all you arm chair theorists who think you know better than the judge. You say there is a world of difference between a 5 year old and 15 year old. True. Same for a 25 year old and a 15 year old. And yet some of us want to treat them the same! That's not right - not legally, not psychologically, not ethically. It's wrong all ways up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 Ceaseless Change seems to believe that in the sentence given he was treated as an adult. How do you know that ? Are you privy to the judge's reasoning, advice, experience and decision ? Did he disregard the defendant's age ? Just what is your argument beyond the one fact that he was a child ? It's not much of a conclusion is it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceaseless Change Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Sorry, correct me if i'm wrong, but I got the distinct impression that many people here thought he SHOULD have been treated like an adult. That is what I am taking issue with. I just said very clearly I am not criticising the judge - so you have totally misunderstood me I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Don't include me in that first line description. You are now trying to manipulate my simple illustration of the 5 and 15 year old by extrapolating the same 10 year difference as if human development had linear progression or some straight line graph relationship. Do you really think that? If not, what point are you really trying to make? Do you think there is a huge stepped change in development the day before someone's 18th birthday compared to their actual birthday? If you do think that, they you appear to be arguing against yourself anyway. You final sentence also appears to show that you too are an armchair theorist but in the other direction. Were you on the jury assuming there was one? Edit to make clear I'm referring to CC's post #20 as the previous two posts appeared whilst not too furiously typing this one.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceaseless Change Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I didn't say the difference was the SAME, between 5 and 15, and 15 and 25! On the other hand there definitely IS a difference - it reads like you are trying to wiggle out of acknowledging that, as if it really is OK to say a 15 year old should just be treated like an adult. If you're not then I'm just misunderstanding you and it sounds like we agree after all. Of course there isn't a stepped change between 17 and 364 days and 18 years old in psychological reality - but that is a different issue, about where you draw a LEGAL line, of IF you should draw a line, between adult and child. Either you believe there should not be a line, or you believe the line should be different on a case by case basis, or you accept that the only viable way of actually doing this is to pick an age and use it for everyone, simply because the other approaches have more problems than benefits. The fact that there is no pragmatic way to actually decide in each individual case if someone is an adult or a child doesn't mean that adults and children as categories don't exist and make sense. They ARE different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceaseless Change Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Anyway, it was Wrighty I think who actually said at 15 he was old enough to know right from wrong and take full responsibility, not you, BB. My only question on the sentence would be - if this is what he got despite being a child, what on earth would the sentence have been if he'd been 18 years old? I'm not sure under UK law it can get much harsher than it already is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Reply to post #24 I'm not trying to wiggle out of anything and you were clearly trying to use the point of a similar 10 year gap . You can't cover that up with semantic woffling. I am trying to point out you appear to be manipulating one factor (age) to suit your mindset. The trouble with drawing lines and then refusing to accept there is any other time-related perspective is that something can be argued to be totally unacceptable one day and perfectly OK the next. Life isn't like that, of course. I therefore think that other considerations can and should over-ride this simple 'line in the sand' MO. Black and white concepts are always easier to argue than grey ones but you might not end up with the right answer although it may be the answer you personally want. Your pivotal point seems to be that he was a child and so the decision is legally and ethically wrong. I'm just suggesting that "it aint necessarily so". If law was that simple we just dispense with the court and follow a flow chart to arrive at a decision. Society wants the right decision here not one apparently based on a flow chart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceaseless Change Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Reply to post #24 Your pivotal point seems to be that he was a child and so the decision is legally and ethically wrong. I'm just suggesting that "it aint necessarily so". I'm sorry you're definitely misunderstanding me. At no point have I ever said the decision is legally and ethically wrong. As I already said, and I really have tried to be clear here: a) I am not questioning the judge b) My problem is with claims like Wrighty's that at 15 he SHOULD HAVE BEEN treated like he was an adult. I have no reason to think the judge treated him like an adult. Hence my question about what the sentence would have been if he had! I agree that having a single age where one second you are legally a child and the next an adult is massively oversimplifying it. But we have that system because no-one has come up with an alternative that actually works properly. Like Democracy, its the worst system, except for all the other ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hillshepherd Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 it seems to me this thread is full of wannabe psychoanalysts,unelected deemsters/judges,and woolley minded fucking liberals,this guy killed a perfectly respectable human being,who by all accounts was a respected talented teacher, he then gloats over it opens a bottle of jack daniels and laughs his fucking head off,i would personally put a bullet in this bastards head,failing that lock him up and throw the key away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceaseless Change Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 i would personally put a bullet in this bastards head,failing that lock him up and throw the key away. But as that is not an option (i mean, whole life sentences and the death penalty are not legal), what do you think should be done to rehabilitate him? If he is going to get released one day.... just chuck him in a cell and hope for the best? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 This isn't about mental age, it's about a disturbed mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.