hyper Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 No comeback apart from the lengthy prison sentence he's likely to receive. Oh yeah, the justice system is how criminals are supposed to be punished. yep, his words against the youth's. Everyone going through protracted interviews and court hearings. Father and child reliving the situation over and over again. The youths lawyer arguing that he had an unfortunate childhood & how society failed him. Maybe even that the father was neglectful for leaving him alone. A lawyers pantomime, with the better actor winning the day. Result - suspended sentence with a tag for 6 months, then back to same business as usual. You mean that justice system? I bolded part of your quote, are you sure you don't want to call it temper, when it relates to anger and rage?maybe, but I'm really not a tempered person or a fighter. I reckon you could hit me and I'd probably not retaliate.... but kids and rape, different matter. If you can't see that, I can convince you no more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 yep, his words against the youth's. Everyone going through protracted interviews and court hearings. Father and child reliving the situation over and over again. The youths lawyer arguing that he had an unfortunate childhood & how society failed him. Maybe even that the father was neglectful for leaving him alone. A lawyers pantomime, with the better actor winning the day. Result - suspended sentence with a tag for 6 months, then back to same business as usual. You mean that justice system? maybe, but I'm really not a tempered person or a fighter. I reckon you could hit me and I'd probably not retaliate.... but kids and rape, different matter. If you can't see that, I can convince you no more It's still his word against the youth's. A beating didn't change that, nor would it be likely to stop him reoffending. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 There are plenty on this thread who think he should have. Lashing out in anger in the given situation is understandable, most people probably would. For others to then relish in the violence, and even call for more serious acts of aggression, is worrying for a supposed civilised society. I, for one, hoped we had put the days of torturing and killing criminals behind us yet sadly, many on hear would have us regress to medieval times. jb I don't think he should have killed him for a second. I'm glad he didn't. I also think its naive to think that he wouldn't physically get involved in some way. I think the majority of people would, but to claim the father was in some way wrong or shouldn't have done it or that he was calculating or vindictive is to my mind just plain wrong and paints the abuser as the victim which seems the wrong way around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 I don't know if you noticed but he didn't beat him to death He fell short of killing him because of his God. Makes you wonder why it took the father to find the perp and child together rather than the child being unable to approach his father on the outset of the abuse. Adults, religion, abuse, must be very confusing for young victims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 If ever a thread needed a poll, it's this one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 If ever a thread needed a poll, it's this one I know my views on this, I don't need one, even if It was 100/1 against my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 He fell short of killing him because of his God. Makes you wonder why it took the father to find the perp and child together rather than the child being unable to approach his father on the outset of the abuse. Adults, religion, abuse, must be very confusing for young victims.For whatever reason he didn't kill him, he didnt. Whether you sneer at him for being weak minded or not he had enough about him to stop. Questioning why the kid didn't approach the father is irrelevant, victims of abuse might not approach their parents for any number of reasons. It doesn't mean that they have bad parents it means that they are being abused and are dealing with it as best they can and probably aren't making good decisions, casting dispersion's on the parenting ability is a vile thing to do. Plenty of children from all walks of life have been abused unless the parents are doing the abusing its not their fault that the children are being abused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 For whatever reason he didn't kill him, he didnt. Whether you sneer at him for being weak minded or not he had enough about him to stop. Questioning why the kid didn't approach the father is irrelevant, victims of abuse might not approach their parents for any number of reasons. It doesn't mean that they have bad parents it means that they are being abused and are dealing with it as best they can and probably aren't making good decisions, casting dispersion's on the parenting ability is a vile thing to do. Plenty of children from all walks of life have been abused unless the parents are doing the abusing its not their fault that the children are being abused. Like you I'm considering ALL avenues, not just "should've killed him" mentality. The whole thing is most likely a very complex set of historical factors. you're right, victims may not approach their parents for a number of factors. One may be that their **** scared of their parents for many differing reasons, as well as many other unrelated parental reasons. As for "not their fault (parents)" I think you'll find that in the vast majority of child abuse cases, it is. The way I see it from the fathers point of view is that he got the temporary fix, not his victim son. The son still has 3yrs of memories that a battering of his perp wont fix, even though I can empathise with his actions regardless of any reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 As for "not their fault (parents)" I think you'll find that in the vast majority of child abuse cases, it is.Thats quite a statement. Care to explain it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 Thats quite a statement. Care to explain it? Most child abuse takes place in the victims home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.