|
Please stop posting that he shouldn't have invited her into his bed since that's apparently not what happened... read the OP and links BEFORE commenting. |
How the hell do you plan on "thinking something different" while you're asleep? Are you trying to be stupid or were you just born that way?
|
To all the people thinking he deserves to be locked up: it could happen to you.
|
On July 10 2011 02:17 Irrelevant wrote:
How the hell do you plan on "thinking something different" while you're asleep? Are you trying to be stupid or were you just born that way?
I didn't say you could while you're asleep. What I said is that if you are given a brain wave test and are awake you can very much fake them. Secondly what I said was that if he does have sexsomania and this girl has been invited to stay at his home, then guess what it is HIS responsibility to TELL HER, that he has sexsomania, sometimes he sleep-walks and may perform sexual acts to people in the house, without his knowledge, out of his control.
He did not do so.
Therefore, he is guilty of raping the girl, regardless of his condition. And sorry but the excuse 'she shouldn't have just hopped into his bed' isn't valid. Because while sure, she probably should not have, I doubt that the last thing she was thinking was that he'd turn around and start groping and having sex with her. Had she known of his condition, she would have not got into his bed. End of discussion.
|
On July 10 2011 02:19 oursblanc wrote:
To all the people thinking he deserves to be locked up: it could happen to you.
No it couldn't cause everyone in here has total control of all their thoughts and intentions while they sleep because they are super powered masters of the universe
|
On July 10 2011 02:25 Irrelevant wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 02:19 oursblanc wrote:
To all the people thinking he deserves to be locked up: it could happen to you. No it couldn't cause everyone in here has total control of all their thoughts and intentions while they sleep because they are super powered masters of the universe
Yes either that or just normal, properly functioning human beings that don't go crazy sleep-walking when we sleep.
|
On July 10 2011 02:25 SichuanPanda wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 02:17 Irrelevant wrote:
How the hell do you plan on "thinking something different" while you're asleep? Are you trying to be stupid or were you just born that way? I didn't say you could while your asleep. What I said is that if you are given a brain wave test and are awake you can very much fake them. Secondly what I said was that if he does have sexsomania and this girl has been invited to stay at his home, then guess what it is HIS responsibility to TELL HER, that he has sexsomania, sometimes he sleep-walks and may perform sexual acts to people in the house, without his knowledge, out of his control. He did not do so. Therefore, he is guilty of raping the girl, regardless of his condition. And sorry but the excuse 'she shouldn't have just hopped into his bed' isn't valid. Because while sure, she probably should not have, I doubt that the last thing she was thinking was that he'd turn around and start groping and having sex with her. Had she known of his condition, she would have not got into his bed. End of discussion.
So you're completely changing the area to be tested just to get results you want so you can pretend to have a point in this discussion.
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On July 10 2011 01:44 Myles wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 01:36 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:24 HereticSaint wrote:On July 09 2011 17:13 Kojak21 wrote:
if a person goes around killing people in his sleep, he should still be held responsible for it, even if he doesnt remember or means to, its to keep other people safe.
this applys to rape and other things also Being, "held responsible" isn't quite the appropriate description of what would be happening under this particular context. You want to know why? Because it would have absolutely no impact on if this occurs in the future again or not. So, what you are actually describing is the need for vengeance over something someone can't control. I'm sick of twits like you comparing someone who wanders around and murders people in their sleep to someone who will potentially stick it to someone who enters their bed (I don't even know for sure if he was naked, but if he was the girl deserved every bit of it and I don't feel bad for her at all, she's 16, not 12). The similarity is only the state of the individual, the crimes are different and therefore you handle them differently. So what if someone kills another person who comes into his bedroom while asleep? Would you also go and say "You were asleep so no big deal dude, go home, everything's okay. You just have no self control in that state and that person shouldn't have come to your bedroom in the first place."? Probably not, right? So where is the big difference to rape? Sure, rape is not as severe as murder but it is still one of the most serious and harmful crimes a person can commit. If there no mens rea, then there's no crime. Get that through your skull. Get out of this stupid black and white world where because something bad happened someone must be punished. Bad shit happens sometimes and people don't mean for it to happen. The guy didn't intend to rape the girl, punishing him for it is simply false justice.
Ok, so you apparantly say that if he killed a person in his sleep who came into his bed, then there would be no reason for the court to do something? Is that what you try to tell me?
|
On July 10 2011 02:26 SichuanPanda wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 02:25 Irrelevant wrote:On July 10 2011 02:19 oursblanc wrote:
To all the people thinking he deserves to be locked up: it could happen to you. No it couldn't cause everyone in here has total control of all their thoughts and intentions while they sleep because they are super powered masters of the universe Yes either that or just normal, properly functioning human beings that don't go crazy sleep-walking when we sleep.
You're a dick and don't know what you are talking about.
|
On July 10 2011 02:26 SichuanPanda wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 02:25 Irrelevant wrote:On July 10 2011 02:19 oursblanc wrote:
To all the people thinking he deserves to be locked up: it could happen to you. No it couldn't cause everyone in here has total control of all their thoughts and intentions while they sleep because they are super powered masters of the universe Yes either that or just normal, properly functioning human beings that don't go crazy sleep-walking when we sleep.
Well as a not normal, malfunctioning human being that goes crazy sleep-walking when I sleep, I say what the hell gives you the right to judge me?
|
On July 10 2011 02:27 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 01:44 Myles wrote:On July 10 2011 01:36 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:24 HereticSaint wrote:On July 09 2011 17:13 Kojak21 wrote:
if a person goes around killing people in his sleep, he should still be held responsible for it, even if he doesnt remember or means to, its to keep other people safe.
this applys to rape and other things also Being, "held responsible" isn't quite the appropriate description of what would be happening under this particular context. You want to know why? Because it would have absolutely no impact on if this occurs in the future again or not. So, what you are actually describing is the need for vengeance over something someone can't control. I'm sick of twits like you comparing someone who wanders around and murders people in their sleep to someone who will potentially stick it to someone who enters their bed (I don't even know for sure if he was naked, but if he was the girl deserved every bit of it and I don't feel bad for her at all, she's 16, not 12). The similarity is only the state of the individual, the crimes are different and therefore you handle them differently. So what if someone kills another person who comes into his bedroom while asleep? Would you also go and say "You were asleep so no big deal dude, go home, everything's okay. You just have no self control in that state and that person shouldn't have come to your bedroom in the first place."? Probably not, right? So where is the big difference to rape? Sure, rape is not as severe as murder but it is still one of the most serious and harmful crimes a person can commit. If there no mens rea, then there's no crime. Get that through your skull. Get out of this stupid black and white world where because something bad happened someone must be punished. Bad shit happens sometimes and people don't mean for it to happen. The guy didn't intend to rape the girl, punishing him for it is simply false justice. Ok, so you apparantly say that if he killed a person in his sleep who came into his bed, then there would be no reason for the court to do something? Is that what you try to tell me?
Would be the same results temporary insanity with some time in under medical supervision in a padded room, would not be charged with murder.
|
On July 10 2011 02:27 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 01:44 Myles wrote:On July 10 2011 01:36 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:24 HereticSaint wrote:On July 09 2011 17:13 Kojak21 wrote:
if a person goes around killing people in his sleep, he should still be held responsible for it, even if he doesnt remember or means to, its to keep other people safe.
this applys to rape and other things also Being, "held responsible" isn't quite the appropriate description of what would be happening under this particular context. You want to know why? Because it would have absolutely no impact on if this occurs in the future again or not. So, what you are actually describing is the need for vengeance over something someone can't control. I'm sick of twits like you comparing someone who wanders around and murders people in their sleep to someone who will potentially stick it to someone who enters their bed (I don't even know for sure if he was naked, but if he was the girl deserved every bit of it and I don't feel bad for her at all, she's 16, not 12). The similarity is only the state of the individual, the crimes are different and therefore you handle them differently. So what if someone kills another person who comes into his bedroom while asleep? Would you also go and say "You were asleep so no big deal dude, go home, everything's okay. You just have no self control in that state and that person shouldn't have come to your bedroom in the first place."? Probably not, right? So where is the big difference to rape? Sure, rape is not as severe as murder but it is still one of the most serious and harmful crimes a person can commit. If there no mens rea, then there's no crime. Get that through your skull. Get out of this stupid black and white world where because something bad happened someone must be punished. Bad shit happens sometimes and people don't mean for it to happen. The guy didn't intend to rape the girl, punishing him for it is simply false justice. Ok, so you apparantly say that if he killed a person in his sleep who came into his bed, then there would be no reason for the court to do something? Is that what you try to tell me?
That's exactly what he's saying. Holy fucking shit you people are dumb.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Parks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On July 10 2011 02:29 Irrelevant wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 02:27 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:44 Myles wrote:On July 10 2011 01:36 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:24 HereticSaint wrote:On July 09 2011 17:13 Kojak21 wrote:
if a person goes around killing people in his sleep, he should still be held responsible for it, even if he doesnt remember or means to, its to keep other people safe.
this applys to rape and other things also Being, "held responsible" isn't quite the appropriate description of what would be happening under this particular context. You want to know why? Because it would have absolutely no impact on if this occurs in the future again or not. So, what you are actually describing is the need for vengeance over something someone can't control. I'm sick of twits like you comparing someone who wanders around and murders people in their sleep to someone who will potentially stick it to someone who enters their bed (I don't even know for sure if he was naked, but if he was the girl deserved every bit of it and I don't feel bad for her at all, she's 16, not 12). The similarity is only the state of the individual, the crimes are different and therefore you handle them differently. So what if someone kills another person who comes into his bedroom while asleep? Would you also go and say "You were asleep so no big deal dude, go home, everything's okay. You just have no self control in that state and that person shouldn't have come to your bedroom in the first place."? Probably not, right? So where is the big difference to rape? Sure, rape is not as severe as murder but it is still one of the most serious and harmful crimes a person can commit. If there no mens rea, then there's no crime. Get that through your skull. Get out of this stupid black and white world where because something bad happened someone must be punished. Bad shit happens sometimes and people don't mean for it to happen. The guy didn't intend to rape the girl, punishing him for it is simply false justice. Ok, so you apparantly say that if he killed a person in his sleep who came into his bed, then there would be no reason for the court to do something? Is that what you try to tell me? Would be the same results temporary insanity with some time in under medical supervision in a padded room, would not be charged with murder.
Yes. But "some time" is a nice understatement. Many years would be more appropiate.
So why is there no such verdict for rape?
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
Ok, thanks for proving my point. If you seriously think the court should let people go back to the street who kill in their sleep then you are just stupid.
|
On July 10 2011 02:32 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 02:29 Irrelevant wrote:On July 10 2011 02:27 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:44 Myles wrote:On July 10 2011 01:36 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:24 HereticSaint wrote:On July 09 2011 17:13 Kojak21 wrote:
if a person goes around killing people in his sleep, he should still be held responsible for it, even if he doesnt remember or means to, its to keep other people safe.
this applys to rape and other things also Being, "held responsible" isn't quite the appropriate description of what would be happening under this particular context. You want to know why? Because it would have absolutely no impact on if this occurs in the future again or not. So, what you are actually describing is the need for vengeance over something someone can't control. I'm sick of twits like you comparing someone who wanders around and murders people in their sleep to someone who will potentially stick it to someone who enters their bed (I don't even know for sure if he was naked, but if he was the girl deserved every bit of it and I don't feel bad for her at all, she's 16, not 12). The similarity is only the state of the individual, the crimes are different and therefore you handle them differently. So what if someone kills another person who comes into his bedroom while asleep? Would you also go and say "You were asleep so no big deal dude, go home, everything's okay. You just have no self control in that state and that person shouldn't have come to your bedroom in the first place."? Probably not, right? So where is the big difference to rape? Sure, rape is not as severe as murder but it is still one of the most serious and harmful crimes a person can commit. If there no mens rea, then there's no crime. Get that through your skull. Get out of this stupid black and white world where because something bad happened someone must be punished. Bad shit happens sometimes and people don't mean for it to happen. The guy didn't intend to rape the girl, punishing him for it is simply false justice. Ok, so you apparantly say that if he killed a person in his sleep who came into his bed, then there would be no reason for the court to do something? Is that what you try to tell me? Would be the same results temporary insanity with some time in under medical supervision in a padded room, would not be charged with murder. Yes. But "some time" is a nice understatement. Many years would be more appropiate. So why is there no such verdict for rape?
Because there is no current threat posed to anyone that doesn't crawl into his bed
|
On July 10 2011 01:44 Myles wrote:
If there no mens rea, then there's no crime.
This sentence is the best one-line legal education possible. Courts of law deal with legal issues, not morality or personal beliefs. The sooner everyone understands this, the sooner we can stop having conversations about issues that are irrelevant to a criminal trial.
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On July 10 2011 02:33 Irrelevant wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 02:32 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 02:29 Irrelevant wrote:On July 10 2011 02:27 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:44 Myles wrote:On July 10 2011 01:36 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:24 HereticSaint wrote:On July 09 2011 17:13 Kojak21 wrote:
if a person goes around killing people in his sleep, he should still be held responsible for it, even if he doesnt remember or means to, its to keep other people safe.
this applys to rape and other things also Being, "held responsible" isn't quite the appropriate description of what would be happening under this particular context. You want to know why? Because it would have absolutely no impact on if this occurs in the future again or not. So, what you are actually describing is the need for vengeance over something someone can't control. I'm sick of twits like you comparing someone who wanders around and murders people in their sleep to someone who will potentially stick it to someone who enters their bed (I don't even know for sure if he was naked, but if he was the girl deserved every bit of it and I don't feel bad for her at all, she's 16, not 12). The similarity is only the state of the individual, the crimes are different and therefore you handle them differently. So what if someone kills another person who comes into his bedroom while asleep? Would you also go and say "You were asleep so no big deal dude, go home, everything's okay. You just have no self control in that state and that person shouldn't have come to your bedroom in the first place."? Probably not, right? So where is the big difference to rape? Sure, rape is not as severe as murder but it is still one of the most serious and harmful crimes a person can commit. If there no mens rea, then there's no crime. Get that through your skull. Get out of this stupid black and white world where because something bad happened someone must be punished. Bad shit happens sometimes and people don't mean for it to happen. The guy didn't intend to rape the girl, punishing him for it is simply false justice. Ok, so you apparantly say that if he killed a person in his sleep who came into his bed, then there would be no reason for the court to do something? Is that what you try to tell me? Would be the same results temporary insanity with some time in under medical supervision in a padded room, would not be charged with murder. Yes. But "some time" is a nice understatement. Many years would be more appropiate. So why is there no such verdict for rape? Because there is no current threat posed to anyone that doesn't crawl into his bed
And why would you assume there is a threat for murder if no one crawls into the murderers bed?
|
On July 10 2011 02:34 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 02:33 Irrelevant wrote:On July 10 2011 02:32 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 02:29 Irrelevant wrote:On July 10 2011 02:27 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:44 Myles wrote:On July 10 2011 01:36 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:24 HereticSaint wrote:On July 09 2011 17:13 Kojak21 wrote:
if a person goes around killing people in his sleep, he should still be held responsible for it, even if he doesnt remember or means to, its to keep other people safe.
this applys to rape and other things also Being, "held responsible" isn't quite the appropriate description of what would be happening under this particular context. You want to know why? Because it would have absolutely no impact on if this occurs in the future again or not. So, what you are actually describing is the need for vengeance over something someone can't control. I'm sick of twits like you comparing someone who wanders around and murders people in their sleep to someone who will potentially stick it to someone who enters their bed (I don't even know for sure if he was naked, but if he was the girl deserved every bit of it and I don't feel bad for her at all, she's 16, not 12). The similarity is only the state of the individual, the crimes are different and therefore you handle them differently. So what if someone kills another person who comes into his bedroom while asleep? Would you also go and say "You were asleep so no big deal dude, go home, everything's okay. You just have no self control in that state and that person shouldn't have come to your bedroom in the first place."? Probably not, right? So where is the big difference to rape? Sure, rape is not as severe as murder but it is still one of the most serious and harmful crimes a person can commit. If there no mens rea, then there's no crime. Get that through your skull. Get out of this stupid black and white world where because something bad happened someone must be punished. Bad shit happens sometimes and people don't mean for it to happen. The guy didn't intend to rape the girl, punishing him for it is simply false justice. Ok, so you apparantly say that if he killed a person in his sleep who came into his bed, then there would be no reason for the court to do something? Is that what you try to tell me? Would be the same results temporary insanity with some time in under medical supervision in a padded room, would not be charged with murder. Yes. But "some time" is a nice understatement. Many years would be more appropiate. So why is there no such verdict for rape? Because there is no current threat posed to anyone that doesn't crawl into his bed And why would you assume there is a threat for murder if no one crawls into the murderers bed? Can you not read English? Lets just clear that up before we continue here.
|
Cant imagine him being justified in Ukraine...
|
On July 10 2011 02:33 Fenrax wrote:Ok, thanks for proving my point. If you seriously think the court should let people go back to the street who kill in their sleep then you are just stupid.
Those links do not prove your point, in fact they are very much the opposite saying you are wrong as he was acquitted of murder and not charged.
|
On July 10 2011 02:34 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2011 02:33 Irrelevant wrote:On July 10 2011 02:32 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 02:29 Irrelevant wrote:On July 10 2011 02:27 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:44 Myles wrote:On July 10 2011 01:36 Fenrax wrote:On July 10 2011 01:24 HereticSaint wrote:On July 09 2011 17:13 Kojak21 wrote:
if a person goes around killing people in his sleep, he should still be held responsible for it, even if he doesnt remember or means to, its to keep other people safe.
this applys to rape and other things also Being, "held responsible" isn't quite the appropriate description of what would be happening under this particular context. You want to know why? Because it would have absolutely no impact on if this occurs in the future again or not. So, what you are actually describing is the need for vengeance over something someone can't control. I'm sick of twits like you comparing someone who wanders around and murders people in their sleep to someone who will potentially stick it to someone who enters their bed (I don't even know for sure if he was naked, but if he was the girl deserved every bit of it and I don't feel bad for her at all, she's 16, not 12). The similarity is only the state of the individual, the crimes are different and therefore you handle them differently. So what if someone kills another person who comes into his bedroom while asleep? Would you also go and say "You were asleep so no big deal dude, go home, everything's okay. You just have no self control in that state and that person shouldn't have come to your bedroom in the first place."? Probably not, right? So where is the big difference to rape? Sure, rape is not as severe as murder but it is still one of the most serious and harmful crimes a person can commit. If there no mens rea, then there's no crime. Get that through your skull. Get out of this stupid black and white world where because something bad happened someone must be punished. Bad shit happens sometimes and people don't mean for it to happen. The guy didn't intend to rape the girl, punishing him for it is simply false justice. Ok, so you apparantly say that if he killed a person in his sleep who came into his bed, then there would be no reason for the court to do something? Is that what you try to tell me? Would be the same results temporary insanity with some time in under medical supervision in a padded room, would not be charged with murder. Yes. But "some time" is a nice understatement. Many years would be more appropiate. So why is there no such verdict for rape? Because there is no current threat posed to anyone that doesn't crawl into his bed And why would you assume there is a threat for murder if no one crawls into the murderers bed?
I would not consider myself a murderer but if you crawl in bed with me in the middle of the night, there is a good chance I would kill you and I would get away with it for many reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
