Sagawa served time in a French jail for the murder of the Dutch student Renée Hartevelt, a classmate at the Sorbonne Academy in Paris, France. On June 11, 1981, Sagawa, a 32 year old student of French literature, invited Hartevelt to dinner under the pretense of literary conversation. Upon her arrival, he shot her in the neck with a rifle while she sat with her back to him at a desk, then began to carry out his plan of eating her.[1] She was selected because of her health and beauty, those characteristics Sagawa believed he lacked. Sagawa describes himself as a "weak, ugly, and small man" (he is just under 5 ft (1.52 m) tall[2]) and claims that he wanted to "absorb her energy".[3]
Sagawa said he fainted after the shock of shooting her, but awoke with the realization that he had to carry out his desire to eat her.[1] He did so, beginning with her hips and legs, after having sex with the corpse. In interviews, he noted his surprise at the "corn-colored" nature of human fat.[2] For two days, Sagawa ate various parts of her body. He described the meat as "soft" and "odorless", like tuna. He then attempted to dump the mutilated body in a remote lake, but was seen in the act and later arrested by the French police.[1]
His wealthy father provided a top lawyer for defense, and after two years without a trial the French judge Louis Bruguiéres found him "obviously" legally insane and unfit to stand trial and ordered Sagawa to be held indefinitely in a mental institution.[1] Through a visit of the author Inuhiko Yomota his memoirs on the murder were published in Japan with the title In the Fog.[1] The constant publicity and macabre celebrity of Sagawa led the French authorities to extradite him to Japan. Not to cause outrage, he was first taken to Matsuzawa hospital, where upon examination psychologists all found him sane but '"evil".[1] Japanese authorities found it impossible to pursue him, purportedly by lacking some pertinent papers from Louis Bruguiéres. As a result, Sagawa checked himself out on August 12, 1986, and has been a free man ever since.[1] [edit] Post-release
Sagawa now lives in Tokyo and is a minor celebrity in Japan. He is often invited as a guest speaker and commentator.[4] He has also written restaurant reviews for the Japanese magazine Spa.[5] In 1992, he appeared in Hisayasu Sato's exploitation film Uwakizuma: Chijokuzeme (Unfaithful Wife: Shameful Torture) as a sadosexual voyeur.[6]
Besides books about the murder he committed, Sagawa wrote a commentary book Shonen A in 1997 on the Kobe children's serial murder of 1997, when a 14-year-old called "Boy A" ("Shonen A") killed and decapitated a child.[7]
Sagawa's story inspired the 1981 Stranglers song "La Folie"[citation needed] and the 1983 Rolling Stones song "Too Much Blood".[2] In 2007, the avant-garde noise-metal band Gnaw their Tongues released an EP titled "Issei Sagawa," the cover of which depicts Sagawa posed with a fork and knife over what appears to be a pair of human legs.[8]
A short film by Olivier Smolders called Adoration is based on Sagawa's story.[9]
Really f***cked up, how the hell could he become a minor celebrity in Japan?
Ugh. ... ugh... Yeah. Some people are just so wacked up. The dude should have got lifetime or maybe even hanged. If it was declared he was mental then more reasons to lock him up for life and/or hang him. I dislike how the law is "too humane" in some aspects but I can live with that. However, I simply don't get why if the accused is declared to be mentally disabled or some shit, they get lesser sentences. Shouldn't you be more strict on locking up psychos?
Sagawa served time in a French jail for the murder of the Dutch student Renée Hartevelt, a classmate at the Sorbonne Academy in Paris, France. On June 11, 1981, Sagawa, a 32 year old student of French literature, invited Hartevelt to dinner under the pretense of literary conversation. Upon her arrival, he shot her in the neck with a rifle while she sat with her back to him at a desk, then began to carry out his plan of eating her.[1] She was selected because of her health and beauty, those characteristics Sagawa believed he lacked. Sagawa describes himself as a "weak, ugly, and small man" (he is just under 5 ft (1.52 m) tall[2]) and claims that he wanted to "absorb her energy".[3]
Sagawa said he fainted after the shock of shooting her, but awoke with the realization that he had to carry out his desire to eat her.[1] He did so, beginning with her hips and legs, after having sex with the corpse. In interviews, he noted his surprise at the "corn-colored" nature of human fat.[2] For two days, Sagawa ate various parts of her body. He described the meat as "soft" and "odorless", like tuna. He then attempted to dump the mutilated body in a remote lake, but was seen in the act and later arrested by the French police.[1]
His wealthy father provided a top lawyer for defense, and after two years without a trial the French judge Louis Bruguiéres found him "obviously" legally insane and unfit to stand trial and ordered Sagawa to be held indefinitely in a mental institution.[1] Through a visit of the author Inuhiko Yomota his memoirs on the murder were published in Japan with the title In the Fog.[1] The constant publicity and macabre celebrity of Sagawa led the French authorities to extradite him to Japan. Not to cause outrage, he was first taken to Matsuzawa hospital, where upon examination psychologists all found him sane but '"evil".[1] Japanese authorities found it impossible to pursue him, purportedly by lacking some pertinent papers from Louis Bruguiéres. As a result, Sagawa checked himself out on August 12, 1986, and has been a free man ever since.[1] [edit] Post-release
Sagawa now lives in Tokyo and is a minor celebrity in Japan. He is often invited as a guest speaker and commentator.[4] He has also written restaurant reviews for the Japanese magazine Spa.[5] In 1992, he appeared in Hisayasu Sato's exploitation film Uwakizuma: Chijokuzeme (Unfaithful Wife: Shameful Torture) as a sadosexual voyeur.[6]
Besides books about the murder he committed, Sagawa wrote a commentary book Shonen A in 1997 on the Kobe children's serial murder of 1997, when a 14-year-old called "Boy A" ("Shonen A") killed and decapitated a child.[7]
Sagawa's story inspired the 1981 Stranglers song "La Folie"[citation needed] and the 1983 Rolling Stones song "Too Much Blood".[2] In 2007, the avant-garde noise-metal band Gnaw their Tongues released an EP titled "Issei Sagawa," the cover of which depicts Sagawa posed with a fork and knife over what appears to be a pair of human legs.[8]
A short film by Olivier Smolders called Adoration is based on Sagawa's story.[9]
Really f***cked up, how the hell could he become a minor celebrity in Japan?
On October 22 2009 10:49 Varn wrote: How is this any worse than any other murder? It's not like he ate her alive. I doubt the girl noticed she was being eaten after she was dead.
You guys are just finding out about this? I've been obsessed with this guy for a while, I can't wrap my head around him. There's been several documentaries about him, I've seen them all and the best one was produced by an Australian TV station. The reporter gave his file to some type of expert criminal analyst (or something, I can't remember exactly what his profession was) and they didn't tell him anything about Sagawa, they just asked his opinion about what should happen to him after reviewing his file. He, of course, said that he should be put in an institution for the rest of his life and then off the cuff asked "So, where is he now?" and the reporter told him that he's living freely in Japan and he showed a horrified look on his face and said "My god ..."
this...isn't right. why is necrophilia and cannibalism being celebrated? I guess he's untouchable because it happened in a foreign country? So disturbing and sad.
i'm questioning whether the japanese actually understand what he did. there is no way a decent group of people could accept an individual after he committed that act. i would NOT let any children go near him and would not want him around in general. cannibalism, murder, necrophilia - i would think any one of them would warrant a life in jail. epic fail by the justice system and the part of japan's society that actually supports the man.
Fucking disgusting, I'm hard-pressed to think of how anyone could possibly even consider doing something like this. That fact that he isn't currently in some institution is insane.
To take a different angle at this, it looks like he has not killed ever since. Which means that if it was just a one time thing, and he does nothing illegal for the rest of his life, Japanese society has managed to subdue such a monster by spamming him with media attention and then re-integrate him into society as a food taster-reviewer. In that it is much more successful than the prison system in terms of re-offending rates and preventing further damage.
However, the family should have a say in what happens to him, instead of him getting off without penalty because his dad knows good lawyers.
On October 22 2009 11:32 251 wrote: this...isn't right. why is necrophilia and cannibalism being celebrated? I guess he's untouchable because it happened in a foreign country? So disturbing and sad.
Dude, murder is the main crime here. Except for adding to the 'gross' factor, I don't see what's so bad about necrophilia and cannibalism. He should be hated because he took another persons life, not because he raped the corpse or ate it.
Andrei Chikatilo: For 12 years, this older man preyed on children in Russia, and while he confessed to as many as 52 murder- mutilations, it's believed that he committed many more. To some extent, what he did might have been influenced by tales his mother told about how his older brother had been cannibalized by Russian peasants driven insane by hunger, because he devoured parts of his victims in that kind of savage manner. After luring them away from train or bus stations into the woods, he would stab them, stuff their mouths with mud, rip at them with his bare hands, and chew off their genitals. He also gouged out their eyes or bit off their tongues, and he often carried their organs away with him. At his trial he was placed in a steel cage for his own protection, which made him look even more like a savage beast. The judge sentenced him to death and he was executed in 1994.
On October 22 2009 10:49 Varn wrote: How is this any worse than any other murder? It's not like he ate her alive. I doubt the girl noticed she was being eaten after she was dead.
This literally blows my mind, how could he be allowed to live freely after this... what the fuck. I can't believe no one has sought some kind of vigilante justice on this guy, and the fact people view him as a celebrity makes me sick to my stomach, almost as sick as those pictures make me feel.
On October 22 2009 11:54 MeNotHazy wrote: Sagawa has nothing on this guy:
Andrei Chikatilo: For 12 years, this older man preyed on children in Russia, and while he confessed to as many as 52 murder- mutilations, it's believed that he committed many more. To some extent, what he did might have been influenced by tales his mother told about how his older brother had been cannibalized by Russian peasants driven insane by hunger, because he devoured parts of his victims in that kind of savage manner. After luring them away from train or bus stations into the woods, he would stab them, stuff their mouths with mud, rip at them with his bare hands, and chew off their genitals. He also gouged out their eyes or bit off their tongues, and he often carried their organs away with him. At his trial he was placed in a steel cage for his own protection, which made him look even more like a savage beast. The judge sentenced him to death and he was executed in 1994.
And this is what he looks like:
just sick. i started to watch this document of this guy.
youtube series. 1 / 8 here --> Andrei Chikatilo'The Butcher of Rostov' Part 7 of 8
On October 22 2009 12:40 omninmo wrote: what bunch of lousy hypocrites. "i cant believe this guy is still alive.. he should be killed for what he did"
Fucking ultra-liberals. you really dont think this guy should be executed?
Regardless, most people have been saying 'locked up', not killed anyways.
It's not a question of being liberal. It's a question of: Who the fuck are you to take away some one elses life?
No he shouldn't be executed. He should be in prison for the rest of his life, or in a mental hospital. NOT being treated like a fucking celebrity in a foreign country.
Anyway, I don't want to de-rail this thread in to another death penalty one. So I'll leave it at that. I'm disgusted with the lacking of papers to deal with him in Japan. Send him back to France then? God sakes how can he possibly walk around a free man and be idolised for what he did.
Hm. I think the sad/fearful part of this story is that an innocent girl was killed, and her body was used in ways she probably wouldn't consent to. That makes it feel dangerous. As to cannibalism and necrophilia... I don't really know that I care that much. Not my cup of tea, certainly, but I find there are far worse and far more common interests in humanity.
I love that line about him being found sane but 'evil.' First of all, what is evil, and second of all, how the hell is someone who thinks they inherit the attributes of what they eat sane? It's not stupid in the 'everyone believes it in this culture' sense, it's actually 'I have no grip on reality even without peer pressure.'
Also, as long as he doesn't shoot or eat anymore people, I really couldn't care less if he isn't in jail. What a waste of money. Retribution against insane people is absolutely worthless in terms of what we create legal institutions to do. You can't make an example of an insane person and think that the next insane person who thinks about doing this is going to have second thoughts. Obviously I'm using insane in an incredibly generic way, but whatever specific mental condition a person has, if a judge can deem they couldn't control their actions, there's no point in sending them to jail. You either try to fix them or you keep them in a pillow room. Or maybe you believe in eugenics, and you kill them.
God sakes how can he possibly walk around a free man and be idolised for what he did.
I doubt he's idolised... Not in the sense you're thinking of. When someone is called a macabre celebrity, it means people are fascinated by how disgusting they are. Like they want to gawk at him. I've never heard him talk recently, so I couldn't tell you if they like listening to him now because he's led such an interesting life, or if they like listening to him because he's completely nuts. My guess is the former, or people wouldn't feel safe around him.
---
Here's some perspective just for fun. Would you rather be tortured for several months, even years of your life? Or would you rather some insane person kill you relatively quickly, then eat and have sex with your body? I'd take the latter every time. And yet do we feel sick to our stomach when we hear about our governments torturing suspected terrorists? Who sometimes turn out to be innocent people caught in the wrong place at the wrong time? I don't. Not sick to my stomach at least, though I think it's a highly debatable intellectual topic.
He didn't torture her at all. That shows some semblance of a person who is more strange than he is malicious, and I think that is a huge factor in how one should form their opinion of him. He even relates his initial disgust with his deed, as if he expected it to be somehow less gory and intimate. And yet somehow our reaction is to be so repulsed by the idea of a story like this... When we hear in the news everyday about people who are tortured, or maimed in military conflict. Personally I try to be consistent in what I find repulsive.
Reading all this makes me want to throw up. This shit should not go unpunished. The man deserves life in prison....actually I wouldn't mind if they killed him. People like that don't deserve to live.
All i can think about is how that corpse he ate was an innocent girl, and i can't help but to think of my girlfriend (the closest person to me ever) and how it's entirely posible that something like this could also happen to her.
On October 22 2009 12:40 omninmo wrote: what bunch of lousy hypocrites. "i cant believe this guy is still alive.. he should be killed for what he did"
Fucking ultra-liberals. you really dont think this guy should be executed?
Regardless, most people have been saying 'locked up', not killed anyways.
your name calling indicates to me that you are not one for discussion but rather prone to repeating what you hear from the radio and/or television. so we will not have a discussion on capital punishment. the state should just kill undesirables... because they can. but do not be tricked into thinking that this is justice. rather is it fascism where might makes right.
also consider this:
locked up means "lives for free" on taxpayer money. do you know how much it cost to keep someone in prison for life (or 20+ years?). putting someone in prison for life is tantamount to locking them in your basement, and providing 3 meals a day, supervising their recreation, and overseeing any visitors. Is this the "justice" you seek?
i am just talking about the impracticality of imprisonment. i have left any moral or ethical questions aside since such questions only lead to dilemas where the two participants emote based on their personal, subjective convictions and any hint of objectivity is absent.
Fuck this litigious, pluralist society. Capital punishment shoudl be banished. In place, the criminals (based on the weight of their crime) should work hard labor in a "concentration camps." For example, for the really bad criminals, we should send them to a remote place in the nevada desert (guarded) and force them to cultivate a desert land and produce their own food. That way, they have to work hard to survive -- instead of bumming around the prison cells, wasting taxpayer money -- and is probably better for "reform" purposes anyway. Any extra revenue created by this camp should benefit the victim or victim's family.
This also solves the sticky issue of capital punishment. I bet many would prefer the death penalty over life in prison. This way, the punishment can be gradated more objectively -- the difficulty of labor depending on their sentence.
I believe this is roughly how it is in North Korea; that is one thing that they have it right.
On October 22 2009 12:40 omninmo wrote: what bunch of lousy hypocrites. "i cant believe this guy is still alive.. he should be killed for what he did"
Fucking ultra-liberals. you really dont think this guy should be executed?
Regardless, most people have been saying 'locked up', not killed anyways.
your name calling indicates to me that you are not one for discussion but rather prone to repeating what you hear from the radio and/or television. so we will not have a discussion on capital punishment. the state should just kill undesirables... because they can. but do not be tricked into thinking that this is justice. rather is it fascism where might makes right.
You're name-calling too. Don't try to take the moral high ground on that, you "lousy hypocrite".
An eye for an eye is certainly justice, if not charity. It's entirely consistent to be opposed to killing innocent people and in favor of killing people who have first killed others: it may be opposed to your own values, but it's not hypocritical.
what do the people who knew this girl feel? i wont take the moral high ground on this case, a man like that should either be dead or locked up. how do japanese people accept him and read his book? do men over there objectify women THAT much? how does he live? this is ridiculous and now I have a bunch of questions but i sure as hell wont buy that book. if any book should be pirated, its that one
money should not be able to assuage his freedom in our legal systems. I think more went on here than we know about. for heavens sake if you're a person who performs the sacred sending ceremony for the dead people consider you dirty and dont believe you have a real job and this guy is making money off a book about fucking and eating the dead? god damn cannibal oj simpson
what do the people who knew this girl feel? i wont take the moral high ground on this case, a man like that should either be dead or locked up. how do japanese people accept him and read his book? do men over there objectify women THAT much? how does he live? this is ridiculous and now I have a bunch of questions but i sure as hell wont buy that book. if any book should be pirated, its that one
money should not be able to assuage his freedom in our legal systems. I think more went on here than we know about. for heavens sake if you're a person who performs the sacred sending ceremony for the dead people consider you dirty and dont believe you have a real job and this guy is making money off a book about fucking and eating the dead? god damn cannibal oj simpson
[edit
I doubt he's idolised... Not in the sense you're thinking of. When someone is called a macabre celebrity, it means people are fascinated by how disgusting they are. Like they want to gawk at him. I've never heard him talk recently, so I couldn't tell you if they like listening to him now because he's led such an interesting life, or if they like listening to him because he's completely nuts. My guess is the former, or people wouldn't feel safe around him.
thats some sensible perspective. chef it took your post to get me past my initial wave of repulsion
I still think, despite the fact he may never kill again, it is still worth taxpayer money for him to be locked up. would you rather have a condom and not need it or need a condom and not have it?
WHAT THE FUCK! and stop judging japan based on this guy. we've got some weird shit (like that rape club) but so does ever other country. I mean look at Roman Polanski. He won an academy award for best film even though he was 'on the run' from the police for raping a minor.
On October 22 2009 17:22 madnessman wrote: WHAT THE FUCK! and stop judging japan based on this guy. we've got some weird shit (like that rape club) but so does ever other country. I mean look at Roman Polanski. He won an academy award for best film even though he was 'on the run' from the police for raping a minor.
Being is the prison is a life too, and a good life might i add. Free food, water, physical activity, communication with other people, own culture and hierarchy, even entertainment. Even if environment is brutal in some people's eyes, person still can be pretty happy/satisfied there and even happier than if he was free.
Execution is the best possible way to deal with this kind of people. Other is loading them with medications until they basically lose their personality and develop horrible permanent side effects in nervous system.
You say Korean bad. You say people too much reason to bash on Japan but Korea worse. You insult my heritage. If you IP ban me I will make it so all video that I upload on the account you give me be remove and account you gave me close. Oh, you don't mean you ban me? Well your Korean and English both bad, your fault, you say you ban so I leave nowbai.
On October 22 2009 17:22 madnessman wrote: WHAT THE FUCK! and stop judging japan based on this guy. we've got some weird shit (like that rape club) but so does ever other country. I mean look at Roman Polanski. He won an academy award for best film even though he was 'on the run' from the police for raping a minor.
Maybe you missed my point. It doesn't matter if Polanski makes good movies (I actually loved The Pianist). The fact is Polanski raped a girl but got away with it. Also... if you think that Sagawa is a real celebrity in Japan, you're mistaken. He's infamous rather than famous.
On October 22 2009 12:40 omninmo wrote: what bunch of lousy hypocrites. "i cant believe this guy is still alive.. he should be killed for what he did"
There is a difference between killing is a form of punishment and self fulfilling pleasure.
Regardless, I am also against death penalty. This guy is clearly insane. I would not even know what sort of punishment a crime like this deserves, but becoming a celebrity is certainly not in my list.
I wish I had not seen those pictures. T_T Like... ugh... This is loathsome and disturbing. I almost threw up. Really, I hope I forget about everything in this thread real soon. It puts me in a terrible mood just indescribable.
On October 22 2009 13:49 Chef wrote: I love that line about him being found sane but 'evil.' First of all, what is evil?
Dictionary says "Morally bad or wrong". Good enough for you?
Hahaha. According to who's morals? Evil=immoral. Immoral=evil. Great definition. It means absolutely nothing. Evil is a great word for the bad guy in a movie you're not supposed to connect with at all or even remotely understand, but in human beings in real life it seems to be to be a term of ignorance. Used to help scapegoat inconvenient people.
Let's say we arbitrarily declare it's immoral/evil to kill someone.
What does every nation need to 'keep safe' (but also to conquor)? An amry.
So maybe we tweak what's immoral about killing. Killing another human being is immoral when it's done for... I don't know, no reason? But killing in the name of land and god and resources is a-okay and just a part of normal human society.
So why did this man kill the girl? He wanted to be taller and more attractive etc. Isn't that conquest? Why is it okay to kill someone from another land for their possessions, but not okay to kill someone from your own land? Is it a need to feel safe with your neighbors?
So it's immoral to kill your neighbor. Do you not need to feel safe from people in other countries? Or when your own country conscripts you to fight? Aren't all the war stories of trauma and life loss indicative that it is incredibly frightening?
So maybe it's only immoral to kill someone without warning. In war you know who's trying to kill you, and you know who you're trying to kill. In the case of neighbors no one expects to be killed.
So it's immoral to kill someone if they don't see it coming (at least in some large sense. It's still okay to bomb buildings your enemy may be sleeping in), but otherwise it's pretty much okay.
If you see what I'm getting at... Morality is a matter of convenience. It's what you want right now. Morality to another person is what they want right now. We're okay with following our own rules as long as everyone else follows them (and anyone who doesn't is called evil) but we're not okay with following someone else's rules if they don't match our own. And that's my page long rant to your sentence long reply.
I'm not sure what are you trying to say other than there is nothing evil or good in this world and all is just from people's perspective. A lot of people are brainwrecked by TV adopting fake morals, but in this one case i don't see how it's complicated, he can easily be tagged as evil by most of the people. Armies go and kill to obtain power or benefits for it's own society/nation, yet such maniac killers can only instill fear into society around them and harm it. The dude is better off dead.
On October 22 2009 20:12 Magic84 wrote: Being is the prison is a life too, and a good life might i add. Free food, water, physical activity, communication with other people, own culture and hierarchy, even entertainment. Even if environment is brutal in some people's eyes, person still can be pretty happy/satisfied there and even happier than if he was free.
Execution is the best possible way to deal with this kind of people. Other is loading them with medications until they basically lose their personality and develop horrible permanent side effects in nervous system.
To what extent would you say it's okay to perform eugenics on people who don't function in society? Just the ones that illegally kill people, or would you go further than that? What if therapy were able to make them safe and functioning? I mean, it's been 30 years, he's 60ish years old now. What are you accomplishing by killing him?
On October 22 2009 20:12 Magic84 wrote: Being is the prison is a life too, and a good life might i add. Free food, water, physical activity, communication with other people, own culture and hierarchy, even entertainment. Even if environment is brutal in some people's eyes, person still can be pretty happy/satisfied there and even happier than if he was free.
Execution is the best possible way to deal with this kind of people. Other is loading them with medications until they basically lose their personality and develop horrible permanent side effects in nervous system.
To what extent would you say it's okay to perform eugenics on people who don't function in society? Just the ones that illegally kill people, or would you go further than that? What if therapy were able to make them safe and functioning? I mean, it's been 30 years, he's 60ish years old now. What are you accomplishing by killing him?
Every case deserves individual approach, but if a guy killed someone to check if the meat is delicious or not, you need to kill it, not jail, the society overall will be happier with that and feel more safe/relieved/thankful for that, and that's the important thing.
There's two directions to go with every decision about morality. You can say only society matters, or you can say only the individual matters, and you can go in varying degrees between them.
But even still, we're talking about an individual who hasn't committed a crime in 30 years. It's not good for society or the individual to go and kill him. It's arguable that studying his mind is more USEFUL to society to better understand what really happened (regarding his mental state at the time, and reflecting how that can be applied to modern psych tests).
Believe me, it's not as simple as jail or death sentence. We have a plethora of options in dealing with people who have special conditions.
On October 22 2009 20:12 Magic84 wrote: Being is the prison is a life too, and a good life might i add. Free food, water, physical activity, communication with other people, own culture and hierarchy, even entertainment. Even if environment is brutal in some people's eyes, person still can be pretty happy/satisfied there and even happier than if he was free.
Execution is the best possible way to deal with this kind of people. Other is loading them with medications until they basically lose their personality and develop horrible permanent side effects in nervous system.
rofl what would you accomplish with that besides your own sense of justice?
I think is goal his to prevent a future crime. The issue is there's no reason to believe he will.
I'd kind of like to know what the girl was thinking on her way to that study session. Probably not much, since study groups are normal, and that late in university you can't be choosy (but then, she went to his own house for dinner, which suggests it was personal)...
Imagine she really liked him and was going to confess her love to him. Oops!
On October 23 2009 02:20 Chef wrote: Certain notorious men in history thought so too.
There's two directions to go with every decision about morality. You can say only society matters, or you can say only the individual matters, and you can go in varying degrees between them.
But even still, we're talking about an individual who hasn't committed a crime in 30 years. It's not good for society or the individual to go and kill him. It's arguable that studying his mind is more USEFUL to society to better understand what really happened (regarding his mental state at the time, and reflecting how that can be applied to modern psych tests).
Believe me, it's not as simple as jail or death sentence. We have a plethora of options in dealing with people who have special conditions.
What kind of benefit the "research" can give? They could count all the neurons he has in every part of the brain, do whatever they want, all kind of mental tests out of curiosity, and then kill him. Overcomplicating things never lead to anything good, especially in relevance to happiness of people, if you want to make people happier, bastard better be terminated, any other option will make people overall less happy with the situation. How exactly does amount of passed time matter, it's not some rape or theft that happened, he killed a girl on purpose.
Also, what will prevent mentally unstable people that hit their low point in life to think "fuck this life and this country, i just gonna go a finally have some fun killing and raping couple of children, and then i let the silly society study my mind, feed me and let me look badass, scary and important on TV"?
On October 22 2009 20:12 Magic84 wrote: Being is the prison is a life too, and a good life might i add. Free food, water, physical activity, communication with other people, own culture and hierarchy, even entertainment. Even if environment is brutal in some people's eyes, person still can be pretty happy/satisfied there and even happier than if he was free.
Execution is the best possible way to deal with this kind of people. Other is loading them with medications until they basically lose their personality and develop horrible permanent side effects in nervous system.
rofl what would you accomplish with that besides your own sense of justice?
This will remove a person from this world in a way and hopefully make the person suffer a lot. I think it can be a proper punishment for some deeds.
On October 22 2009 13:49 Chef wrote: I love that line about him being found sane but 'evil.' First of all, what is evil?
Dictionary says "Morally bad or wrong". Good enough for you?
Hahaha. According to whose morals? Evil=immoral. Immoral=evil. Great definition.
Let's say we arbitrarily declare it's immoral/evil to kill someone. ...
I thought you might be driving at that, but in the very post I originally quoted from, you brought in torture as something that you find "repulsive". I thought that that made it clear that you did subscribe to a moral system. Maybe I was wrong in assuming that you considered it more than a matter of taste. Still, for anyone who does believe in a universal morality that has nothing to do with individual's beliefs, "evil" is a meaningful word; for that matter, even if you don't believe in that yourself, it's still a meaningful word, just like the word "centaur", for example.
Evil=immoral. Immoral=evil. Great definition.
Pardon me, but this is sophistry. In the first place, you can make statements like that about every word in the dictionary (although the chain might extend further than two words). In the second place, you're the one who added the second part, "Immoral = evil." The dictionary doesn't say that, actually: referring once again to answers.com, it has "Contrary to established moral principles." If you further inquire as to what these principles are, that would be a meaningful discussion.
Granted, the rest of your post did go into detail about why you don't think any foundation of moral principles can be meaningfully established. I don't personally agree with you there: I think quite a simple and elegant one can be built off of the Golden Rule, but in any case, can you go so far as to agree that society, or at any rate the majority of people who constitute it, does share a certain set of moral standards, and that deliberate deviation from it can be legitimately considered "evil" from their point of view, even if you think the POV itself is invalid? Then that's what the doctors were saying.
I could try to go further and address your main attack on the foundations of morality, but first let me ask you: you're an intellectual sort--is this just an intellectual issue to you? Or do you genuinely believe that you have absolutely no right to judge someone else for any crime at all? II'm not asking about your intellectual beliefs, I'm asking how you feel.
On October 23 2009 01:54 Cloud wrote: I think it's fair to define morality as the set of virtues that make society progress as a whole.
Killing is rarely ever productive. Especially in long terms.
Society would still progress as a whole if morality would change quite alot. Our morality, at least in the western world is based on christianity and christian values to a large degree. Don't take it for granted as the only kind of morale there is.
That depends on your view of what "productive" is. It might be productive to kill off people if the earth was super-overpopulated, however it wouldn't be seen as morally right with our current moral.
you brought in torture as something that you find "repulsive".
I really don't think I did at all. I said I'd rather be killed and eaten than be tortured. That doesn't say anything about whether I think torture is immoral or not. I don't believe in morality as a sense of human decency. I think what people mislabel morality is really their own personal convenience of what they like and don't like.
is this just an intellectual issue to you? Or do you genuinely believe that you have absolutely no right to judge someone else for any crime at all? II'm not asking about your intellectual beliefs, I'm asking how you feel.
I believe that if someone commits some act (crime or otherwise) and you don't like that act, you have all the right not to like the person, not to want to be around them, and really to do whatever you want. The issue I take is with the idea of giving your actions some higher purpose, like for the sake of morality you kill a dangerous person. No, you killed the dangerous person because you felt threatened. Them committing an act you didn't like, and you taking your revenge shouldn't be justified because "they're immoral" it should be justified because you think it will improve your life.
So I "feel" that it's dangerous and stupid to ignore the real reasons we do things and instead believe that everything is somehow based on morality. I "feel" there's no reason to do anything to this man because he isn't dangerous anymore, he's been in jail (tho he was sentenced longer) and basically we're trying to get revenge on a man because of some false sense of morality, rather than remembering the reasons we had to do anything 30 years ago. My point being that the reasons have expired, they don't hold up anymore, but people's sense of morality never dies and causes them to be vengeful without good reason.
I don't know if that explains well what I mean or not. Certainly 30 years ago I'd have pissed my pants to be in the same house with this person, but today? I'd probably feel safe enough (whether I'd find him amiable or not is a different question).
you brought in torture as something that you find "repulsive".
I really don't think I did at all. I said I'd rather be killed and eaten than be tortured. That doesn't say anything about whether I think torture is immoral or not. I don't believe in morality as a sense of human decency. I think what people mislabel morality is really their own personal convenience of what they like and don't like.
is this just an intellectual issue to you? Or do you genuinely believe that you have absolutely no right to judge someone else for any crime at all? II'm not asking about your intellectual beliefs, I'm asking how you feel.
I believe that if someone commits some act (crime or otherwise) and you don't like that act, you have all the right not to like the person, not to want to be around them, and really to do whatever you want. The issue I take is with the idea of giving your actions some higher purpose, like for the sake of morality you kill a dangerous person. No, you killed the dangerous person because you felt threatened. Them committing an act you didn't like, and you taking your revenge shouldn't be justified because "they're immoral" it should be justified because you think it will improve your life.
So I "feel" that it's dangerous and stupid to ignore the real reasons we do things and instead believe that everything is somehow based on morality. I "feel" there's no reason to do anything to this man because he isn't dangerous anymore, he's been in jail (tho he was sentenced longer) and basically we're trying to get revenge on a man because of some false sense of morality, rather than remembering the reasons we had to do anything 30 years ago. My point being that the reasons have expired, they don't hold up anymore, but people's sense of morality never dies and causes them to be vengeful without good reason.
I don't know if that explains well what I mean or not. Certainly 30 years ago I'd have pissed my pants to be in the same house with this person, but today? I'd probably feel safe enough (whether I'd find him amiable or not is a different question).
Well it's more logical to give this man to relatives, mother, father of victim and let them do what they want, kill, torture, dismember alive, feed to dogs.
This way it will be revenge and not only punishment based on morality and social perspective, revenge is a natural, healthy and proper thing to have for human psyche. As well as all the law protections and human rights could be lift off him, so anybody could kill or hurt him with no consequences. But that would create a lot of controversy and additional social problems, so it's better to kill him via official execution.
This guy could be perfectly sane and reasonable as he is right now, he could also be more valuable and inspiring to society then most "normal" people are. To judge him based on his past without knowing him presently is unfair. Roman Polanski is another example. In reality not all people are equal under the law. Nothing is absolute.
On October 23 2009 05:21 food wrote: This guy could be perfectly sane and reasonable as he is right now, he could also be more valuable and inspiring to society then most "normal" people are. To judge him based on his past without knowing him presently is unfair. Roman Polanski is another example. People are equal under the law, but some are more equal then others. Nothing is absolute.
You do know he COOKED and ATE an innocent girl right?
Also, you do know Roman Polanski drugged and raped a little girl right?
Lol, If I ever commit a terrible crime, I'd like you to be my judge. I'll just say "I'm productive now! tee-hee" and you'll let me go.
On October 23 2009 02:44 Chef wrote: I think is goal his to prevent a future crime. The issue is there's no reason to believe he will.
I'd kind of like to know what the girl was thinking on her way to that study session. Probably not much, since study groups are normal, and that late in university you can't be choosy (but then, she went to his own house for dinner, which suggests it was personal)...
Imagine she really liked him and was going to confess her love to him. Oops!
Here's an excerpt of an interview with him (2009):
Do you still have these cannibalistic urges?
Oh yes, definitely. The desire to eat people becomes so intense around June, when women start wearing less and showing more skin. Just today, I saw a girl with a really nice derrière on my way to the train station. When I see things like that, I think about wanting to eat someone again before I die. So yes, I do still harbor these desires, and I specifically want to eat a Japanese woman this time. I think either sukiyaki or shabu shabu [lightly boiled thin slices] is the best way to go in order to really savor the natural flavor of the meat. Can you please call for people who would willingly be eaten by me in your magazine? There’s one condition, though: They have to be young, beautiful women.
you brought in torture as something that you find "repulsive".
I really don't think I did at all. I said I'd rather be killed and eaten than be tortured. That doesn't say anything about whether I think torture is immoral or not. I don't believe in morality as a sense of human decency. I think what people mislabel morality is really their own personal convenience of what they like and don't like.
is this just an intellectual issue to you? Or do you genuinely believe that you have absolutely no right to judge someone else for any crime at all? II'm not asking about your intellectual beliefs, I'm asking how you feel.
I believe that if someone commits some act (crime or otherwise) and you don't like that act, you have all the right not to like the person, not to want to be around them, and really to do whatever you want. The issue I take is with the idea of giving your actions some higher purpose, like for the sake of morality you kill a dangerous person. No, you killed the dangerous person because you felt threatened. Them committing an act you didn't like, and you taking your revenge shouldn't be justified because "they're immoral" it should be justified because you think it will improve your life.
So I "feel" that it's dangerous and stupid to ignore the real reasons we do things and instead believe that everything is somehow based on morality. I "feel" there's no reason to do anything to this man because he isn't dangerous anymore, he's been in jail (tho he was sentenced longer) and basically we're trying to get revenge on a man because of some false sense of morality, rather than remembering the reasons we had to do anything 30 years ago. My point being that the reasons have expired, they don't hold up anymore, but people's sense of morality never dies and causes them to be vengeful without good reason.
I don't know if that explains well what I mean or not. Certainly 30 years ago I'd have pissed my pants to be in the same house with this person, but today? I'd probably feel safe enough (whether I'd find him amiable or not is a different question).
Well it's more logical to give this man to relatives, mother, father of victim and let them do what they want, kill, torture, dismember alive, feed to dogs.
This way it will be revenge and not only punishment based on morality and social perspective, revenge is a natural, healthy and proper thing to have for human psyche. As well as all the law protections and human rights could be lift off him, so anybody could kill or hurt him with no consequences. But that would create a lot of controversy and additional social problems, so it's better to kill him via official execution.
On October 23 2009 05:21 food wrote: This guy could be perfectly sane and reasonable as he is right now, he could also be more valuable and inspiring to society then most "normal" people are. To judge him based on his past without knowing him presently is unfair. Roman Polanski is another example. In reality not all people are equal under the law. Nothing is absolute.
On October 23 2009 02:44 Chef wrote: I think is goal his to prevent a future crime. The issue is there's no reason to believe he will.
I'd kind of like to know what the girl was thinking on her way to that study session. Probably not much, since study groups are normal, and that late in university you can't be choosy (but then, she went to his own house for dinner, which suggests it was personal)...
Imagine she really liked him and was going to confess her love to him. Oops!
Here's an excerpt of an interview with him (2009):
Oh yes, definitely. The desire to eat people becomes so intense around June, when women start wearing less and showing more skin. Just today, I saw a girl with a really nice derrière on my way to the train station. When I see things like that, I think about wanting to eat someone again before I die. So yes, I do still harbor these desires, and I specifically want to eat a Japanese woman this time. I think either sukiyaki or shabu shabu [lightly boiled thin slices] is the best way to go in order to really savor the natural flavor of the meat. Can you please call for people who would willingly be eaten by me in your magazine? There’s one condition, though: They have to be young, beautiful women.
I guess at least he wants them to consent this time...
But I'll admit that scares me if that's true. It's hard to say how he means it, and maybe he's just embracing the media attention but in that case... Tho I'm not blood thirsty I wouldn't mind if he dropped dead lol. It's hard to justify preemptively killing someone for a crime they haven't committed (ie a second murder, since the first one has no legal means)... And he's talking about eating a person, not murdering the person (though aside from suicide how else would they die?)
That looks like a job for the men in white coats to me. Take him in until it seems like he's cured, or put him down... No questions about morality here (ours or his) just plain we have the power (well we don't, but if we did) and he doesn't.
On October 23 2009 05:21 food wrote: This guy could be perfectly sane and reasonable as he is right now, he could also be more valuable and inspiring to society then most "normal" people are. To judge him based on his past without knowing him presently is unfair. Roman Polanski is another example. People are equal under the law, but some are more equal then others. Nothing is absolute.
You do know he COOKED and ATE an innocent girl right?
Also, you do know Roman Polanski drugged and raped a little girl right?
Lol, If I ever commit a terrible crime, I'd like you to be my judge. I'll just say "I'm productive now! tee-hee" and you'll let me go.
I wouldn't be the judge to begin with unless it was personal. Then again, any of these two made more impact on society than you ever will. If you died in a car accident tomorrow no one would even notice. The fact that this guy was released and became famous is more important than the punishment he escaped. It ridicules the legal system and the values of society. He is ten times more important the way he is. What do you achieve by killing him? It would become another nameless act buried in hundreds of thousands cases.
Oh yes, definitely. The desire to eat people becomes so intense around June, when women start wearing less and showing more skin. Just today, I saw a girl with a really nice derrière on my way to the train station. When I see things like that, I think about wanting to eat someone again before I die. So yes, I do still harbor these desires, and I specifically want to eat a Japanese woman this time. I think either sukiyaki or shabu shabu [lightly boiled thin slices] is the best way to go in order to really savor the natural flavor of the meat. Can you please call for people who would willingly be eaten by me in your magazine? There’s one condition, though: They have to be young, beautiful women.
He has an army of readers to feed. It is a show he puts on in order to stay in the spotlight. If he expressed a serious desire to kill or posed any kind of threat he would be put into a mental institution.
On October 23 2009 04:46 Magic84 wrote: Well it's more logical to give this man to relatives, mother, father of victim and let them do what they want, kill, torture, dismember alive, feed to dogs.
This way it will be revenge and not only punishment based on morality and social perspective, revenge is a natural, healthy and proper thing to have for human psyche. As well as all the law protections and human rights could be lift off him, so anybody could kill or hurt him with no consequences. But that would create a lot of controversy and additional social problems, so it's better to kill him via official execution.
On October 23 2009 05:21 food wrote: This guy could be perfectly sane and reasonable as he is right now, he could also be more valuable and inspiring to society then most "normal" people are. To judge him based on his past without knowing him presently is unfair. Roman Polanski is another example. People are equal under the law, but some are more equal then others. Nothing is absolute.
You do know he COOKED and ATE an innocent girl right?
Also, you do know Roman Polanski drugged and raped a little girl right?
Lol, If I ever commit a terrible crime, I'd like you to be my judge. I'll just say "I'm productive now! tee-hee" and you'll let me go.
I wouldn't be the judge to begin with unless it was personal. Then again, any of these two made more impact on society than you ever will. If you died in a car accident tomorrow no one would even notice. The fact that this guy was released and became famous is more important than the punishment he escaped. It ridicules the legal system and the values of society. He is ten times more important the way he is. What do you achieve by killing him? It would become another nameless act buried in hundreds of thousands cases.
I never said they should be killed, way to be an ass. I simply don't think they should go unpunished.
On October 23 2009 05:21 food wrote: This guy could be perfectly sane and reasonable as he is right now, he could also be more valuable and inspiring to society then most "normal" people are. To judge him based on his past without knowing him presently is unfair. Roman Polanski is another example. In reality not all people are equal under the law. Nothing is absolute.
he is sane and reasonable. we are judging him by his actions, if not that what other way to fairly judge someone? the guy in an interview said he is still looking for a young blonde girl to eat her. seems like he changed? don't talk out of your ass.
On October 23 2009 05:33 snowbird wrote: Here's an excerpt of an interview with him (2009):
Do you still have these cannibalistic urges?
Oh yes, definitely. The desire to eat people becomes so intense around June, when women start wearing less and showing more skin. Just today, I saw a girl with a really nice derrière on my way to the train station. When I see things like that, I think about wanting to eat someone again before I die. So yes, I do still harbor these desires, and I specifically want to eat a Japanese woman this time. I think either sukiyaki or shabu shabu [lightly boiled thin slices] is the best way to go in order to really savor the natural flavor of the meat. Can you please call for people who would willingly be eaten by me in your magazine? There’s one condition, though: They have to be young, beautiful women.
He has an army of readers to feed. It is a show he puts on in order to stay in the spotlight. If he expressed a serious desire to kill or posed any kind of threat he would be put into a mental institution.
On October 23 2009 04:46 Magic84 wrote: Well it's more logical to give this man to relatives, mother, father of victim and let them do what they want, kill, torture, dismember alive, feed to dogs.
This way it will be revenge and not only punishment based on morality and social perspective, revenge is a natural, healthy and proper thing to have for human psyche. As well as all the law protections and human rights could be lift off him, so anybody could kill or hurt him with no consequences. But that would create a lot of controversy and additional social problems, so it's better to kill him via official execution.
In Russia, we eat people when they eat us
Speaking of it, i wish we still had a death sentence in Russia and also many other things. All the current pro-liberal television bullshit just wrecks minds of people, i find it a social disaster when people come to the point of discussing if such man deserves to be alive, let alone free. And it's not just a forum trolling, it happens irl. This is a betrayal of inherent human side for the sake of fake morals and indifference. I would talk a lot about that.
He is ten times more important the way he is.
Sure this guy is important, my fart is important, it changed the chemical balance of the atmosphere. By the way nobody has any guarantees that he didn't kill somebody else during the last 30 years or if he doesn't plan to do so in the future. He proved it's not a big deal for him.
This just fucking sickens me. If you eat someone you deserve to get to get tortured for the rest of you're life IMO, minimally living, just on the verge of death, unless its a life or death situation of course. And if you kill someone I think you deserve to die defiantly, IDC about the illness, you deserve to die.
On October 22 2009 11:42 Megalisk wrote: In Japan, If it can be made into an anime, its legal.
On October 23 2009 05:33 snowbird wrote: Here's an excerpt of an interview with him (2009):
Do you still have these cannibalistic urges?
Oh yes, definitely. The desire to eat people becomes so intense around June, when women start wearing less and showing more skin. Just today, I saw a girl with a really nice derrière on my way to the train station. When I see things like that, I think about wanting to eat someone again before I die. So yes, I do still harbor these desires, and I specifically want to eat a Japanese woman this time. I think either sukiyaki or shabu shabu [lightly boiled thin slices] is the best way to go in order to really savor the natural flavor of the meat. Can you please call for people who would willingly be eaten by me in your magazine? There’s one condition, though: They have to be young, beautiful women.
He has an army of readers to feed. It is a show he puts on in order to stay in the spotlight. If he expressed a serious desire to kill or posed any kind of threat he would be put into a mental institution.
On October 23 2009 04:46 Magic84 wrote: Well it's more logical to give this man to relatives, mother, father of victim and let them do what they want, kill, torture, dismember alive, feed to dogs.
This way it will be revenge and not only punishment based on morality and social perspective, revenge is a natural, healthy and proper thing to have for human psyche. As well as all the law protections and human rights could be lift off him, so anybody could kill or hurt him with no consequences. But that would create a lot of controversy and additional social problems, so it's better to kill him via official execution.
In Russia, we eat people when they eat us
Speaking of it, i wish we still had a death sentence in Russia and also many other things. All the current pro-liberal television bullshit just wrecks minds of people, i find it a social disaster when people come to the point of discussing if such man deserves to be alive, let alone free. And it's not just a forum trolling, it happens irl. This is a betrayal of inherent human side for the sake of fake morals and indifference. I would talk a lot about that.
Russia is liberal? You need to wake up. You have just as much freedom as they want you to. You have a taste of it but you never seen beyond that. And from what you've said already seems like you want it to be even stricter. Some people are born slaves, there's nothing you can change.
What's "betrayal of inherent human side"? Does it even mean anything? Kindness and forgiveness are "inherent human side" too or are they not? At least sort your shit out before unloading it.
"Fake morals"? Where did you see that? I am the one saying that morals are bent all the time depending on situation and it's only natural. Basically you are stating that the general idea that this guy had to be prosecuted and either imprisoned or kept in a mental institution is "fake morals". You just threw some words out there that happened to be completely irrelevant.
What about "indifference"? Who's indifferent, someone who gives criminal his second chance or someone who's centered on vengeance? You don't even have an argument.
Sure this guy is important, my fart is important, it changed the chemical balance of the atmosphere. By the way nobody has any guarantees that he didn't kill somebody else during the last 30 years or if he doesn't plan to do so in the future. He proved it's not a big deal for him.
No, your fart isn't important, you are not important( no more then your fart is). It might shock you, but this guy is already beyond what you will ever be just by being alive and doing the shit he does.
By the way nobody has any guarantees that you didn't kill somebody during all the 13 years of your life. Actually nobody has guarantees you aren't mentally challenged either, I'm still talking to you though.
On October 23 2009 05:33 snowbird wrote: Here's an excerpt of an interview with him (2009):
Do you still have these cannibalistic urges?
Oh yes, definitely. The desire to eat people becomes so intense around June, when women start wearing less and showing more skin. Just today, I saw a girl with a really nice derrière on my way to the train station. When I see things like that, I think about wanting to eat someone again before I die. So yes, I do still harbor these desires, and I specifically want to eat a Japanese woman this time. I think either sukiyaki or shabu shabu [lightly boiled thin slices] is the best way to go in order to really savor the natural flavor of the meat. Can you please call for people who would willingly be eaten by me in your magazine? There’s one condition, though: They have to be young, beautiful women.
He has an army of readers to feed. It is a show he puts on in order to stay in the spotlight. If he expressed a serious desire to kill or posed any kind of threat he would be put into a mental institution.
On October 23 2009 04:46 Magic84 wrote: Well it's more logical to give this man to relatives, mother, father of victim and let them do what they want, kill, torture, dismember alive, feed to dogs.
This way it will be revenge and not only punishment based on morality and social perspective, revenge is a natural, healthy and proper thing to have for human psyche. As well as all the law protections and human rights could be lift off him, so anybody could kill or hurt him with no consequences. But that would create a lot of controversy and additional social problems, so it's better to kill him via official execution.
In Russia, we eat people when they eat us
Speaking of it, i wish we still had a death sentence in Russia and also many other things. All the current pro-liberal television bullshit just wrecks minds of people, i find it a social disaster when people come to the point of discussing if such man deserves to be alive, let alone free. And it's not just a forum trolling, it happens irl. This is a betrayal of inherent human side for the sake of fake morals and indifference. I would talk a lot about that.
Russia is liberal? You need to wake up. You have just as much freedom as they want you to. You have a taste of it but you never seen beyond that. And from what you've said already seems like you want it to be even stricter. Some people are born slaves, there's nothing you can change.
What's "betrayal of inherent human side"? Does it even mean anything? Kindness and forgiveness are "inherent human side" too or are they not? At least sort your shit out before unloading it.
"Fake morals"? Where did you see that? I am the one saying that morals are bent all the time depending on situation and it's only natural. Basically you are stating that the general idea that this guy had to be prosecuted and either imprisoned or kept in a mental institution is "fake morals". You just threw some words out there that happened to be completely irrelevant.
What about "indifference"? Who's indifferent, someone who gives criminal his second chance or someone who's centered on vengeance? You don't even have an argument.
Sure this guy is important, my fart is important, it changed the chemical balance of the atmosphere. By the way nobody has any guarantees that he didn't kill somebody else during the last 30 years or if he doesn't plan to do so in the future. He proved it's not a big deal for him.
No, your fart isn't important, you are not important( no more then your fart is). It might shock you, but this guy is already beyond what you will ever be just by being alive and doing the shit he does.
By the way nobody has any guarantees that you didn't kill somebody during all the 13 years of your life. Actually nobody has guarantees you aren't mentally challenged either, I'm still talking to you though.
Don't talk about freedom too much, you don't have that, your people is oppressed with taboos, censorship and restrictions no less than russians, but more from what i've seen. What is a freedom to you, it's like you know what you are talking about.
I don't matter, you don't matter, alright we are nobodies to decide what to do with lives of other people even if they are killers right, especially if they got promoted by TV to celebrity status, and we are all equals to hannibal killers right, not even equals but lesser people? Lets just drop the legal system altogether, everybody is a nobody to decide anything for anybody. You are a train wreck, dude.
On October 23 2009 08:27 Magic84 wrote: I don't matter, you don't matter, alright we are nobodies to decide what to do with lives of other people even if they are killers right, especially if they got promoted by TV to celebrity status, and we are all equals to hannibal killers right, not even equals but lesser people? Lets just drop the legal system altogether, everybody is a nobody to decide anything for anybody. You are a train wreck, dude.
your English gets worse when you get angry get some beer and watch Rurouni Kenshin with me. They originated that peaceful killer shit mang we can drink for Stalin too
On October 23 2009 05:21 food wrote: This guy could be perfectly sane and reasonable as he is right now, he could also be more valuable and inspiring to society then most "normal" people are. To judge him based on his past without knowing him presently is unfair. Roman Polanski is another example. People are equal under the law, but some are more equal then others. Nothing is absolute.
You do know he COOKED and ATE an innocent girl right?
Also, you do know Roman Polanski drugged and raped a little girl right?
Lol, If I ever commit a terrible crime, I'd like you to be my judge. I'll just say "I'm productive now! tee-hee" and you'll let me go.
I wouldn't be the judge to begin with unless it was personal. Then again, any of these two made more impact on society than you ever will. If you died in a car accident tomorrow no one would even notice. The fact that this guy was released and became famous is more important than the punishment he escaped. It ridicules the legal system and the values of society. He is ten times more important the way he is. What do you achieve by killing him? It would become another nameless act buried in hundreds of thousands cases.
I hope he eats you. I bet no one would care about that either.
"I know I'm crazy...I'm crazy...but please don't hate me."
Hmmmm. After thinking about it, Sagawa can't help the way he was born. His desire to eat a beautiful woman is just as strong as any normal persons desire to say, simply have sex with a hot babe. What he did was, of course, atrocious, but I think it was fair that he was judged as "incurably insane".
I just think he'd lived with these emotions and feelings his entire life, and eventually just "snapped" one day and lived out his desires. The fact that he's had multiple lovers and girlfriends that he's refrained from eating shows that he knows what he did was wrong.
Killing him or tossing him in a prison for the rest of his life won't accomplish anything and it won't change what he did. I'm sure it would make the family of the girl feel better, but I'd be more inclined to study the psychology behind his state of mind.
Lastly, the worst. I didn’t know a thing about the Sagawa case and decided to go looking myself. I can’t really bear to go further in my research because it is beyond heartbreaking. I think it’s safe to say that the poor girl has been victimized by authorities and the media in both France and Japan. The French judge unilaterally decided there would be no trial (despite public outrage), and committed the SOB to a hospital. He was interviewed on French television, a French publisher got a hold of his prison diaries, and (worst of all, how is this even allowed?) Paris Match ran the autopsy photos—I couldn’t sleep last night. Finally, France deported him, then refused to provide Japanese authorities (who wanted to charge him) with the case files. To top off this hideous story, a Japanese psychiatrist pronounced the killer ‘cured’, and 5 years after the murder, he was a free man.
His fame/infamy in Japan is more complex than the international media has reported. The name “Sagawa-kun” is not a sign of affection, but taken from the disquieting title of a novel “Sagawa-kun kara no tegami (Letters from Sagawa-kun)”, by Kara Juro, a Japanese playwright who was contacted by Sagawa about writing the screenplay of ‘his story’ after someone approached him while at the French hospital. The novel (which Sagawa opposed) is described as bleak, hallucinatory and existential, and won a prestigious literary prize. After his release, Sagawa himself took to producing memoirs, novels and ‘the psychology of a killer’ type of books, and his public appearances seem to mostly stem from those. He has apologists/champions among the self-declared avante-garde, and plies his trade as the resident Dr. Lecter whenever a particularly disturbing murder takes place. I found scant evidence that he has enjoyed any genuine acceptance in Japanese society. In a country where being a ‘regular’ ex-con or a psychiatric patient negatively impacts your life, it seems unlikely that most people see him with anything but fear and loathing. I found a mention that he was evicted from an apartment in late 2004 after the landlord discovered who he was.
This is a description of the scene when he visited the backstage of a performance he was invited to:
“As soon as he entered, the entire backstage was plunged into a grim, oppressive atmosphere. It was as though everyone had lowered their voice to a whisper and watching his every move. When Sagawa, seeing a box of sweets on the table, asked “Can I eat these too?”, every person jumped noticeably.” http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/佐川一政
Someone on the trackback speculated about his father’s wartime occupation. I was curious myself, and this is what I found. His father was drafted, sent to Manchuria, then interned in Siberia. He flew to Paris after the arrest, and had his first stroke there. Sagawa’s mother had a nervous breakdown. For 20 years, the elder Sagawa seems to have paid his son’s rent (Issei Sagawa is not a particularly successful writer, it seems), despite the latter declaring that the crime was all his father’s fault for being overprotective. The elder Sagawa was increasingly incapacitated by a series of strokes, and died in 2005. His wife died the following day.
The fascination that both the European and the Japanese press seem to hold for this twisted nothing of a person is infuriating. Is this the dark side of Old World arts culture, that seems to blindly value the experience of taboo transgression? Is it just too easy an acceptance of death and suffering, curdling into a particularly morbid and repulsive aesthetic? Is this why serial killer porn and gore sites are proliferating in the U.S. as well?
I wonder if Renee Hartevelt’s parents are out there still, trying to live in a world that is more like Sagawa and less like their daughter.
On October 23 2009 05:21 food wrote: This guy could be perfectly sane and reasonable as he is right now, he could also be more valuable and inspiring to society then most "normal" people are. To judge him based on his past without knowing him presently is unfair. Roman Polanski is another example. In reality not all people are equal under the law. Nothing is absolute.
..... what?
You sound surprised that a guy named food sympathizes with a cannibal
On October 23 2009 05:33 snowbird wrote: Here's an excerpt of an interview with him (2009):
Do you still have these cannibalistic urges?
Oh yes, definitely. The desire to eat people becomes so intense around June, when women start wearing less and showing more skin. Just today, I saw a girl with a really nice derrière on my way to the train station. When I see things like that, I think about wanting to eat someone again before I die. So yes, I do still harbor these desires, and I specifically want to eat a Japanese woman this time. I think either sukiyaki or shabu shabu [lightly boiled thin slices] is the best way to go in order to really savor the natural flavor of the meat. Can you please call for people who would willingly be eaten by me in your magazine? There’s one condition, though: They have to be young, beautiful women.
He has an army of readers to feed. It is a show he puts on in order to stay in the spotlight. If he expressed a serious desire to kill or posed any kind of threat he would be put into a mental institution.
On October 23 2009 04:46 Magic84 wrote: Well it's more logical to give this man to relatives, mother, father of victim and let them do what they want, kill, torture, dismember alive, feed to dogs.
This way it will be revenge and not only punishment based on morality and social perspective, revenge is a natural, healthy and proper thing to have for human psyche. As well as all the law protections and human rights could be lift off him, so anybody could kill or hurt him with no consequences. But that would create a lot of controversy and additional social problems, so it's better to kill him via official execution.
In Russia, we eat people when they eat us
Speaking of it, i wish we still had a death sentence in Russia and also many other things. All the current pro-liberal television bullshit just wrecks minds of people, i find it a social disaster when people come to the point of discussing if such man deserves to be alive, let alone free. And it's not just a forum trolling, it happens irl. This is a betrayal of inherent human side for the sake of fake morals and indifference. I would talk a lot about that.
Russia is liberal? You need to wake up. You have just as much freedom as they want you to. You have a taste of it but you never seen beyond that. And from what you've said already seems like you want it to be even stricter. Some people are born slaves, there's nothing you can change.
What's "betrayal of inherent human side"? Does it even mean anything? Kindness and forgiveness are "inherent human side" too or are they not? At least sort your shit out before unloading it.
"Fake morals"? Where did you see that? I am the one saying that morals are bent all the time depending on situation and it's only natural. Basically you are stating that the general idea that this guy had to be prosecuted and either imprisoned or kept in a mental institution is "fake morals". You just threw some words out there that happened to be completely irrelevant.
What about "indifference"? Who's indifferent, someone who gives criminal his second chance or someone who's centered on vengeance? You don't even have an argument.
Sure this guy is important, my fart is important, it changed the chemical balance of the atmosphere. By the way nobody has any guarantees that he didn't kill somebody else during the last 30 years or if he doesn't plan to do so in the future. He proved it's not a big deal for him.
No, your fart isn't important, you are not important( no more then your fart is). It might shock you, but this guy is already beyond what you will ever be just by being alive and doing the shit he does.
By the way nobody has any guarantees that you didn't kill somebody during all the 13 years of your life. Actually nobody has guarantees you aren't mentally challenged either, I'm still talking to you though.
important is a wrong word choice it has a good connotation, I rather use "relevant" but we'll roll with this. Being "important" is not necessarily good. fuck that can be applied to any dictator in the world, with the premise that they "changed the world"
On October 23 2009 05:33 snowbird wrote: Here's an excerpt of an interview with him (2009):
Do you still have these cannibalistic urges?
Oh yes, definitely. The desire to eat people becomes so intense around June, when women start wearing less and showing more skin. Just today, I saw a girl with a really nice derrière on my way to the train station. When I see things like that, I think about wanting to eat someone again before I die. So yes, I do still harbor these desires, and I specifically want to eat a Japanese woman this time. I think either sukiyaki or shabu shabu [lightly boiled thin slices] is the best way to go in order to really savor the natural flavor of the meat. Can you please call for people who would willingly be eaten by me in your magazine? There’s one condition, though: They have to be young, beautiful women.
He has an army of readers to feed. It is a show he puts on in order to stay in the spotlight. If he expressed a serious desire to kill or posed any kind of threat he would be put into a mental institution.
On October 23 2009 04:46 Magic84 wrote: Well it's more logical to give this man to relatives, mother, father of victim and let them do what they want, kill, torture, dismember alive, feed to dogs.
This way it will be revenge and not only punishment based on morality and social perspective, revenge is a natural, healthy and proper thing to have for human psyche. As well as all the law protections and human rights could be lift off him, so anybody could kill or hurt him with no consequences. But that would create a lot of controversy and additional social problems, so it's better to kill him via official execution.
In Russia, we eat people when they eat us
Speaking of it, i wish we still had a death sentence in Russia and also many other things. All the current pro-liberal television bullshit just wrecks minds of people, i find it a social disaster when people come to the point of discussing if such man deserves to be alive, let alone free. And it's not just a forum trolling, it happens irl. This is a betrayal of inherent human side for the sake of fake morals and indifference. I would talk a lot about that.
Russia is liberal? You need to wake up. You have just as much freedom as they want you to. You have a taste of it but you never seen beyond that. And from what you've said already seems like you want it to be even stricter. Some people are born slaves, there's nothing you can change.
What's "betrayal of inherent human side"? Does it even mean anything? Kindness and forgiveness are "inherent human side" too or are they not? At least sort your shit out before unloading it.
"Fake morals"? Where did you see that? I am the one saying that morals are bent all the time depending on situation and it's only natural. Basically you are stating that the general idea that this guy had to be prosecuted and either imprisoned or kept in a mental institution is "fake morals". You just threw some words out there that happened to be completely irrelevant.
What about "indifference"? Who's indifferent, someone who gives criminal his second chance or someone who's centered on vengeance? You don't even have an argument.
Sure this guy is important, my fart is important, it changed the chemical balance of the atmosphere. By the way nobody has any guarantees that he didn't kill somebody else during the last 30 years or if he doesn't plan to do so in the future. He proved it's not a big deal for him.
No, your fart isn't important, you are not important( no more then your fart is). It might shock you, but this guy is already beyond what you will ever be just by being alive and doing the shit he does.
By the way nobody has any guarantees that you didn't kill somebody during all the 13 years of your life. Actually nobody has guarantees you aren't mentally challenged either, I'm still talking to you though.
Hey pseudomoltke, you're not funny. No one buys that you actually think this guy is sane.
He's more important than any of us just because he is more famous? Are you kidding? Im sure that most people in this world know Tila Tequila much better than say, Tesla. Are you gonna imply that somehow that ugly slut is more important than Tesla?
Well, going through this topic certainly took up a lot of my class time. I don't know what to think about this. imo, it's a pretty interesting case but I don't think he should be free in Japan right now. Especially when he shows urges of wanting to eat another human again.
Punishment or traditional imprisonment will not solve any problems, but I believe he should be put under permanent psychological evaluation for the rest of his life, ethically within a controlled environment, and use him for a case study as it will be helpful to prevent more incidents, or at the very least, understand better. I would do the same for severely mentally ill convicts as well, of course not anywhere in the mainstream public.
Revenge, death penalty, and emotional disregard offers nothing, there is opportunity here.
But it strikes me curious how this man has been able to get through life normally like this without any severe repercussions from the people around him. What kind of cultural elements make Japan the butt of all dysfunctional and deviant stereotypes?
The cannibalism is disturbing, yeah, but it's really not the cannibalism that bothers me. It's the fact that he killed this woman for the sole purpose of eating her, and that despite this fact he remains a free man that bugs me a lot. Abusing a person physically and emotionally to their mental breakdown and/or death is far worse than simply killing a person and then eating them afterward. But even so, you really shouldn't be able to get away after killing someone on a whim for god's sake.
On October 22 2009 10:41 Dave[9] wrote: wow wtf he fucked the corpse he was eating...
dont generalize about japanese with this. This one sick bastard, just like the dpweroizki maniacs (the russians who killed people with hammer) or many many retarded humans that ever came to exists. He could've been whatever nationality.
sooo sick anyways. Pretty sad cuz the girl looked pretty cute. but damn... how the hell could he be released from a mental institution..
On October 28 2009 09:14 Night[Mare wrote: dont generalize about japanese with this. This one sick bastard, just like the dpweroizki maniacs (the russians who killed people with hammer) or many many retarded humans that ever came to exists. He could've been whatever nationality.
sooo sick anyways. Pretty sad cuz the girl looked pretty cute. but damn... how the hell could he be released from a mental institution..
You dont get it, he isnt japanese. The japanese just love him. Read the thread.
The fucked up part is that he got released and then became a celebrity. How fucked up is that? You know, I'm just so damn glad that my country doesn't give mercy on capital punishment for anyone who commits a murder of any nature.
Humanity doesn't need freedom. Humanity needs to be disciplined.
On October 22 2009 10:49 Varn wrote: How is this any worse than any other murder? It's not like he ate her alive. I doubt the girl noticed she was being eaten after she was dead.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://johnschop.nl/images/2008-11/renee_hartevelt_003.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Spring03/Rawlins/images/sag1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_78EKtg_AOsI/SgbUvwiO8XI/AAAAAAAAA64/KNUR8OKPlAM/s320/ren%C3%A9e.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://resonanteye.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/14-corps_peite.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/8899/15tetepetitesd4.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://t.douban.com/lpic/s1993794.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://pic.itiexue.net/pics/2009_7_30_20459_9720459.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://resonanteye.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/8-assiettes_pleines_petite.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://resonanteye.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/sagawascene2.jpg?w=200&h=300)
![[image loading]](http://i38.tinypic.com/14sm9tz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://tejiendoelmundo.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/sagawa.jpg)
