If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Man raped and abused 3 MN preteen girls, fled to Ireland and abused 2 more. US: Can we have him back, please? Britain: No. You'll just be mean to him. Besides, we already gave him a good talking to, and he's promised not to do it again   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 248
    More: Asinine, Ministry of Justice, Extradition Act, United States, senior judge, Gary McKinnon, Home Secretary, Fort Benning, Ireland  
•       •       •

19440 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Jun 2012 at 6:39 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



248 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-06-28 10:46:06 PM
freemasonry.bcy.ca
 
2012-06-28 11:48:27 PM
If only the CIA were more like in the movies.

Go to whereever, find this guy, wait three years, pop him in the head with a zip gun, leave the country.
 
2012-06-28 11:51:46 PM
A sentence worse than death:

i47.tinypic.com

Case dismissed.
 
2012-06-29 12:44:30 AM
Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No
 
2012-06-29 01:08:39 AM

DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No


You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.
 
2012-06-29 01:19:18 AM

cman: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.


Actually, I didn't, which is why I said "reads to me"

Colour me entirely unsurprised that the Daily Fail is sensationalising another bullshiat argument then.
 
2012-06-29 01:39:23 AM

cman: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.


That's comforting. I wonder why they mistrust this.

What happened to his wife's chin?
 
2012-06-29 02:22:49 AM
Stop raping children, or I'll say stop raping children again!
 
2012-06-29 02:26:10 AM
You raped again? That's it, no dessert for you young man.
 
2012-06-29 02:32:45 AM
imwillingtohitman
 
2012-06-29 02:36:22 AM
They probably think he just has a foot fetish because we spell paedophile wrong.
 
2012-06-29 02:37:27 AM

AbbeySomeone: What happened to his wife's chin?


She's English.
 
2012-06-29 02:50:21 AM

TsarTom: AbbeySomeone: What happened to his wife's chin?

She's English.


At least she's not smiling.
 
2012-06-29 02:54:19 AM
So, rather than agreeing to Britain's demands, and locking that guy up for 50 years after a fair trial, during which we'd know for sure he wouldn't be abusing children, the United States insists on the right to lock him up indefinitely without charges, essentially allowing him to go free since they knew the judges wouldn't go for it. Lovely.
 
2012-06-29 04:27:09 AM
I wonder how compassionate the Brits will feel after he rapes a few young girls there.
 
2012-06-29 04:32:28 AM

Cubansaltyballs: I wonder how compassionate the Brits will feel after he rapes a few young girls there.


He did already.
 
2012-06-29 06:43:24 AM
so..
 
2012-06-29 06:46:14 AM
Was it really necessary to put McKinnon in an article with baby rapers? farking bullshiat propaganda.
 
2012-06-29 06:47:29 AM
I don't disagree with the thinking behind civil commitment but you can't argue that indefinite detention, possibly without even a fair trial, would contravene the legal rights of a person under UK and EU law.

Perhaps it's time for the law to be changed for some circumstances. It's certainly not fine just to ignore the laws on America's say-so.
 
2012-06-29 06:51:12 AM
Well, as long as Britain keeps extraditing the really dangerous offenders, like the ones who hack into the Pentagon looking for information on UFOs, and the ones who publish things embarrassing to the government on WikiLeaks... why not turn them into a penal/penile colony for our sickos?
 
2012-06-29 06:53:34 AM
Now that is a punchable face.
 
2012-06-29 06:53:34 AM
He could change his name to Orenthal.
 
2012-06-29 06:53:55 AM
Sullivan lives in London with his wife, who works for the Ministry of Justice

Well there you go...
 
2012-06-29 06:58:05 AM

tankjr: Was it really necessary to put McKinnon in an article with baby rapers? farking bullshiat propaganda.


Too farking right...... +1
 
2012-06-29 07:02:26 AM
They extradite Assange but not this farker?
 
2012-06-29 07:03:14 AM
He should have his testicles removed and hung from the highest gate in London as a warning to others. That said, civil commitment is an unamerican and unconstitutional farce. I dislike the outcome, but justice in general must outweigh justice for this one arsehat.
 
2012-06-29 07:06:47 AM

cman: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.


So in essence, you could be confined for life w/o benefit of a trial. I see.
 
2012-06-29 07:08:49 AM

doglover: Cubansaltyballs: I wonder how compassionate the Brits will feel after he rapes a few young girls there.

He did already.


He was only caught once, who knows how many little girls he's actually raped.

I believe a country has a right to not extradite someone if they think the accused will be mistreated, but for God's sake he's already raped their own children. I think it's a shut f*cking case by now.
 
2012-06-29 07:13:01 AM

"I'm dialing up a new young Limey victim right now!"


i.dailymail.co.uk

 
2012-06-29 07:14:29 AM
European Convention on Human Rights

HAHA like Europe matters...send in the SEALS

/seriously though i would like to read the opinion..anyone have a link if there is one?
 
2012-06-29 07:15:50 AM

Tat'dGreaser: doglover: Cubansaltyballs: I wonder how compassionate the Brits will feel after he rapes a few young girls there.

He did already.

He was only caught once, who knows how many little girls he's actually raped.

I believe a country has a right to not extradite someone if they think the accused will be mistreated, but for God's sake he's already raped their own children. I think it's a shut f*cking case by now.


Indeed. But if they feel he has "done his time" under their laws, Britain is under no obligation to hand him over to the U.S., if they feel he might receive unfair or cruel treatment. Once upon a time, the U.S. would take the exact same stance with countries that might torture or kill a prisoner.

Now we ship those countries our political prisoners. Oh how times have changed!
 
2012-06-29 07:16:32 AM
Am I gonna get raped?
i.dailymail.co.uk
"What do you think?"
 
2012-06-29 07:18:11 AM
i47.tinypic.comwww.filehurricane.com
 
2012-06-29 07:20:02 AM
the goal of the sex offender program in the US is to encourage them to reoffend.
it's like a doctor signing a doctors program
 
2012-06-29 07:20:35 AM
Civil commitment does involve the court system, and coming from my old therapist, there is too much pressure from the judges in those cases for the doctors to write unfavorable reports that it is essentially life imprisonment. In one case, the judge and prosecutor double-teamed him when he said that the patient was no more likely to reoffend than any other person. They insisted that he was wrong and demanded that he accept responsibility if the guy ever reoffended. When he refused to accept it, they discarded his recommendation and sent the guy back.
 
2012-06-29 07:22:28 AM

cman:
It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient.

Whereas in the UK the Mental Health Act makes damn sure that the legal system is involved in any detention. We're picky like that, and don't like locking people up indefinitely without legal recourse. Habeus Corpus, Magna Carta, that sort of thing.

While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.
The BBC claims that nobody has ever (since 1988) been released from the programme. If that's true, does it worry you?
 
2012-06-29 07:22:30 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: So, rather than agreeing to Britain's demands, and locking that guy up for 50 years after a fair trial, during which we'd know for sure he wouldn't be abusing children, the United States insists on the right to lock him up indefinitely without charges, essentially allowing him to go free since they knew the judges wouldn't go for it. Lovely.


"lock him up indefinitely without charges"

Or, as we see it, to define pedophilia as a serious mental disorder that makes you a danger to others and treat it as such.

If you have sexual desires for underage girls, that on its own is not a crime. Depending on how underage it might not even be psychologically abnormal (hence the "she looked 18!" claims). However, if you both desire seriously underage girls and cannot control your urges for them to the point you rape little girls, you're seriously farked up in the head. If we sent them to prison, they'd get killed by the general population in there in no time if they knew you were a kiddy diddler.

They could be released at any time, if the psychiatrist thinks they aren't going to molest/rape children any more. How the hell does the UK's mental health commitment work? They don't have involuntary commitment for the criminally mentally ill? If somebody is committing serious offenses because of a mental health problem they don't let Doctors sort it out?

The rest of the world dumps on the US for not looking at rehabilitation of offenders and going straight to punishment, but we start talking about sending offenders into the mental health system for treatment of the underlying cause of their behavior and they get irate as well.

Can't please some people.

/Can I haz extraordinary rendition?
 
2012-06-29 07:26:58 AM
Actually I'm pained to admit that seems like a fairly accurate article by the daily mail having read about this on the BBC and The Times.

Obviously he should go to America and face trial, but as he doesn't seem to have offended since he was in his 20s or so and it's now 18 years and he's living with an adult woman later I do wonder what this "America's Most Wanted Sex Criminal" status is about. Being charitable it seems like exaggeration at best.

The problem here is partly that influence on the British system by the European Convention on Human Rights has raised the definition of "Human Rights" to a ridiculous standard.
Secondly a truly halfwitted Extradition Act which Tony Blair signed with the USA because he trusted you guys. More fool him, now it seems that the British legal system can be manipulated by attention seeking local DAs of low moral status who would be lucky to get jobs as cleaning court floors over here and sloppy/dishonest/corrupt federal agencies.

In this particular case my first instinct is to say that the locals in Minnesota should be brought to heel but no doubt there are States Rights issues there so it's not possible.

So, although the legal system here is far from perfect and as a fellow common law country there is much we can and should learn from the US, I'm not eager to have your legal system over here as quite frankly it seems that large parts of it are shiattily run.
And don't get me started on Europe.

OK, rant over.
 
2012-06-29 07:29:03 AM

MmmmBacon: Indeed. But if they feel he has "done his time" under their laws, Britain is under no obligation to hand him over to the U.S., if they feel he might receive unfair or cruel treatment. Once upon a time, the U.S. would take the exact same stance with countries that might torture or kill a prisoner.

Now we ship those countries our political prisoners. Oh how times have changed!


Well then that's sad, but they can just deal with him raping their children.

Hide yo wife, hide yo kids, no seriously because he's probably going to rape them.
 
2012-06-29 07:29:35 AM
The government should have just agreed to the demand, and once he was back in the country quietly tell the judge to give the guy 50 years in jail.
 
2012-06-29 07:31:36 AM

Makh: They probably think he just has a foot fetish because we spell paedophile wrong.


Peter File?
 
2012-06-29 07:31:52 AM

cman: It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.


And if there is any justice in the universe, Alan Horowitz will stay in a hospital for the rest of his life. In a pain amplifier.
 
2012-06-29 07:32:05 AM

Tat'dGreaser: MmmmBacon: Indeed. But if they feel he has "done his time" under their laws, Britain is under no obligation to hand him over to the U.S., if they feel he might receive unfair or cruel treatment. Once upon a time, the U.S. would take the exact same stance with countries that might torture or kill a prisoner.

Now we ship those countries our political prisoners. Oh how times have changed!

Well then that's sad, but they can just deal with him raping their children.

Hide yo wife, hide yo kids, no seriously because he's probably going to rape them.


Even though he hasn't done so in over 15 years?
 
2012-06-29 07:33:31 AM

vsavatar: Even though he hasn't done so in over 15 years?


Oh yes you are right. Just because he did it in America and then again in Ireland, he's completely satisfied. Nope, it's normal behavior to continually rape young girls everywhere you go.
 
2012-06-29 07:34:59 AM
What a stupid coont might look like:
i.dailymail.co.uk
 
2012-06-29 07:35:23 AM
Listen, all we have to do is surreptitiously plant a couple handguns and some ammo in his home, and then phone in an anonymous tip. Maybe even consider SWATting him. Once the Bobbies/Peelers/whatever find those, he's going away for a long, long time. Bonus: They'll be footing the bill for it, all while congratulating themselves for getting some "dangerous guns" off the street.
 
2012-06-29 07:35:55 AM
The limey cocksuckers have denied extradition on 9 people while we've never denied them their criminals. In addition they released the Lockerbie bomber early. Too bad it's their kids who are going to be the ones paying the price instead of the asswipe liberturds in the government.
 
2012-06-29 07:37:46 AM

ethics-gradient: Actually I'm pained to admit that seems like a fairly accurate article by the daily mail having read about this on the BBC and The Times.

Obviously he should go to America and face trial, but as he doesn't seem to have offended since he was in his 20s or so and it's now 18 years and he's living with an adult woman later I do wonder what this "America's Most Wanted Sex Criminal" status is about. Being charitable it seems like exaggeration at best.

The problem here is partly that influence on the British system by the European Convention on Human Rights has raised the definition of "Human Rights" to a ridiculous standard.
Secondly a truly halfwitted Extradition Act which Tony Blair signed with the USA because he trusted you guys. More fool him, now it seems that the British legal system can be manipulated by attention seeking local DAs of low moral status who would be lucky to get jobs as cleaning court floors over here and sloppy/dishonest/corrupt federal agencies.

In this particular case my first instinct is to say that the locals in Minnesota should be brought to heel but no doubt there are States Rights issues there so it's not possible.

So, although the legal system here is far from perfect and as a fellow common law country there is much we can and should learn from the US, I'm not eager to have your legal system over here as quite frankly it seems that large parts of it are shiattily run.
And don't get me started on Europe.

OK, rant over.


you make solid points and I do not intend to detract from that. However, at least on sexual abuse in my jurisdiction (I cannot speak to Minnesota) there is no statute of limitations on felony sexual assault crimes. What he allegedly did arises to a felony. At least from what I have read on the European Law..he should be returned. I have not found the opinion yet so I do not know on what legal basis the court denied that despite Daily Fails arguments which most likely have nothing to do with the actual law
...so for now I disagree with the British Courts determination. Despite the often over the top rhetoric the United States is not North Korea.
 
2012-06-29 07:38:39 AM

vsavatar: Tat'dGreaser: MmmmBacon: Indeed. But if they feel he has "done his time" under their laws, Britain is under no obligation to hand him over to the U.S., if they feel he might receive unfair or cruel treatment. Once upon a time, the U.S. would take the exact same stance with countries that might torture or kill a prisoner.

Now we ship those countries our political prisoners. Oh how times have changed!

Well then that's sad, but they can just deal with him raping their children.

Hide yo wife, hide yo kids, no seriously because he's probably going to rape them.

Even though he hasn't done so in over 15 years?


That you *KNOW* about.

Even if he was totally reformed, and only dipped his wick in ex-prostitute granny sluts since then, it's irrelevant to the matter of him answering for the crimes he's already committed.
 
2012-06-29 07:38:40 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: So, rather than agreeing to Britain's demands, and locking that guy up for 50 years after a fair trial, during which we'd know for sure he wouldn't be abusing children, the United States insists on the right to lock him up indefinitely without charges, essentially allowing him to go free since they knew the judges wouldn't go for it. Lovely.


You misspelled "insists on the ability to treat him in a hospital setting instead of sending him to PMITA prison."
 
2012-06-29 07:39:58 AM

dittybopper: That you *KNOW* about.


This too, he was only caught twice. Who the f*ck knows how many times he's done this. You have to be completely in-the-clouds naive to believe he only did this twice.
 
2012-06-29 07:41:23 AM
dnrtfa

but if he abused kids in Ireland, how'd he end up in British custody?

Surely the Irish government would be asking for extradition as well as the US?

/are we confusing Ireland with Northern Ireland again?
 
2012-06-29 07:42:55 AM

jodaveki: cman: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.

So in essence, you could be confined for life w/o benefit of a trial. I see.


Only if you're pedantic. There idsa technical difference between a criminal trial and a commitment hearing but you have full due process.
 
2012-06-29 07:45:38 AM
Does the UK still have a mafia that might do a free-be just for good international relations?
 
2012-06-29 07:45:59 AM
Sounds about right for LimeyLand.
 
2012-06-29 07:50:44 AM
Lord Justice Moses and Mr Justice Eady both believe the programme, known as 'civil commitment', would be a 'flagrant denial' of his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

But critics will see it as another example of the one-sided extradition treaty between the two countries.

Last week it emerged that seven times more British citizens have been sent to the US under the lopsided Extradition Act than Americans sent in the opposite direction.


I've read this part of the article about 10 times now and I still don't understand it. What the hell does this case have to do with extraditing Americans to the UK?

Does the Daily Mail just mention random sh*t in articles that they know will outrage their mouthbreathing readership whether it's relevant or not?
 
2012-06-29 07:50:54 AM

thisone: dnrtfa

but if he abused kids in Ireland, how'd he end up in British custody?

Surely the Irish government would be asking for extradition as well as the US?

/are we confusing Ireland with Northern Ireland again?


Thats the thing...

He's not in anyone's custody.

He's free to walk around looking like Ken Marino's lesser known brother to diddle any young girl he pleases.
 
2012-06-29 07:51:58 AM
I guess we know where he went after he left Philly...
images.wikia.com

As an aside, how prescient was that episode when they get the kid to blackmail him to leave by claiming that he was a "tickle monster"? Apparently this must be pretty common in PA.
 
2012-06-29 07:52:01 AM
They can keep him, then.

Saves us tax money and at least he won't be raping Americans.
 
2012-06-29 07:54:13 AM
I read that as "Man raped and abused by 3 MN preteen girls"
 
2012-06-29 07:55:16 AM
I still feel that child molesters and pedophiles that are convicted should be tortured slowly and killed by the worst and least expensive means. I can't stop thinking about how terrible and terrifying it must be to be a child and going through that. no mercy for sex offenders. Kill them all.

Sorry if I offended anyone. It's just that I really detest these people.
 
2012-06-29 07:57:10 AM

OMG! We're All Gonna Die!: I still feel that child molesters and pedophiles that are convicted should be tortured slowly and killed by the worst and least expensive means. I can't stop thinking about how terrible and terrifying it must be to be a child and going through that. no mercy for sex offenders. Kill them all.

Sorry if I offended anyone. It's just that I really detest these people.



But that would infringe on his human rights.

And honestly...who deserves their human rights protected more then someone who rapes children?
 
2012-06-29 07:57:12 AM
So he's a convicted paedophile and the UK wants to keep him over there?
I'm okay with that.

/Not sure why we're bashing his wife, tho. She's a UK 7.
 
2012-06-29 07:59:31 AM
They will extradite him as soon as the US offers guarantees that they will follow their own constitution. It's interesting that the constitution seems to no longer be a legal document but a religious one where fanatics (RON PAUL) pick and chose what bits they actually want to follow without realising it is meant to all be followed all the time and for everyone including paedophiles.

Sullivan's lawyer, Ben Brandon, previously told the court no one had been released from the treatment programme, operated by the Department of Human Services in Minnesota, since it began in its current form in 1988.

Well that certainly doesn't sound like that "treatment" programme is a complete failure then nor does it sound like an attempt to deny liberty without due process. Just give him a trial and then lock him up as long as you want. It seems that US government is not convinced he is guilty of what he has been accused and therefore don't want it to go to a trial.
 
2012-06-29 08:00:36 AM
I see no problem letting England keep child rapists if they want them. Better then having them in the US after all.
 
2012-06-29 08:01:39 AM
We are happy to extradite anybody who violates riaa tho......feckin' arsholes
 
2012-06-29 08:03:26 AM
FTFA:

was given a suspended jail sentence in Ireland in 1996 for sexually assaulting two 12-year-old girls

I could give a crap if the UK wants to keep our sex offenders but WTF is with Ireland giving this guy his walking papers after raping 12yo girls?
 
2012-06-29 08:04:07 AM

goatan: They will extradite him as soon as the US offers guarantees that they will follow their own constitution. It's interesting that the constitution seems to no longer be a legal document but a religious one where fanatics (RON PAUL) pick and chose what bits they actually want to follow without realising it is meant to all be followed all the time and for everyone including paedophiles.

Sullivan's lawyer, Ben Brandon, previously told the court no one had been released from the treatment programme, operated by the Department of Human Services in Minnesota, since it began in its current form in 1988.

Well that certainly doesn't sound like that "treatment" programme is a complete failure then nor does it sound like an attempt to deny liberty without due process. Just give him a trial and then lock him up as long as you want. It seems that US government is not convinced he is guilty of what he has been accused and therefore don't want it to go to a trial.


There are some of us who like the Constitution, but think RON PAUL is an asshat. As to treatment programs I personally have argued that we should drop the charade and if we are going to lock up child molesters for life we should just sentence to life and stop the legal fiction.
 
2012-06-29 08:05:58 AM
From the article:

Last week it emerged that seven times more British citizens have been sent to the US under the lopsided Extradition Act than Americans sent in the opposite direction.

To me it sounds like either they're trying to play politics and even the amount extradited on both sides, or they just don't give a fark anymore once the criminal has left the country.
"What? They left the country? Tea time!"
 
2012-06-29 08:08:26 AM
Girls from MN said he was kinda funny lookin'
www.homevideos.com
 
2012-06-29 08:09:11 AM

Tat'dGreaser: ?


That it's been 18 years only shows he's finally learned dead girls tell no tales.
 
2012-06-29 08:09:52 AM
i think EVERYONE in the world should have to REGISTER as a SEX OFFENDER
 
2012-06-29 08:10:19 AM

RibbyK: So he's a convicted paedophile and the UK wants to keep him over there?
I'm okay with that.

/Not sure why we're bashing his wife, tho. She's a UK 7.


Well, the fact that Chinless Wonder works for the Ministry of Justice and apparently used her job to window-shop for a husband in the British Penal System is pretty bash-worthy...

The British Penal System - where even she can find a penile...
 
2012-06-29 08:10:52 AM

NotSubby: FTFA:

was given a suspended jail sentence in Ireland in 1996 for sexually assaulting two 12-year-old girls

I could give a crap if the UK wants to keep our sex offenders but WTF is with Ireland giving this guy his walking papers after raping 12yo girls?


Maybe he claimed to be a priest, so he was given a pass? Although probably some raised eyebrows over it being girls.
 
2012-06-29 08:12:01 AM

goatan: They will extradite him as soon as the US offers guarantees that they will follow their own constitution. It's interesting that the constitution seems to no longer be a legal document but a religious one where fanatics (RON PAUL) pick and chose what bits they actually want to follow without realising it is meant to all be followed all the time and for everyone including paedophiles.

Sullivan's lawyer, Ben Brandon, previously told the court no one had been released from the treatment programme, operated by the Department of Human Services in Minnesota, since it began in its current form in 1988.

Well that certainly doesn't sound like that "treatment" programme is a complete failure then nor does it sound like an attempt to deny liberty without due process. Just give him a trial and then lock him up as long as you want. It seems that US government is not convinced he is guilty of what he has been accused and therefore don't want it to go to a trial.


Because some people cannot be treated. If your completely broken, there really isn't much they can do for you other than make sure you don't hurt anyone.

That said, I don't think that would be the case with guy. He wouldn't get bail, he is a flight risk X ∞... So instead of Civil Commitment, he would get remanded to jail where hopefully he would be continuously raped until he died.
 
2012-06-29 08:15:58 AM

NewportBarGuy: A sentence worse than death:

[i47.tinypic.com image 306x607]

Case dismissed.


Well to be fair the English don't have chins or teeth.
 
2012-06-29 08:17:12 AM

orbister: cman:
It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient.
Whereas in the UK the Mental Health Act makes damn sure that the legal system is involved in any detention. We're picky like that, and don't like locking people up indefinitely without legal recourse. Habeus Corpus, Magna Carta, that sort of thing.

While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.
The BBC claims that nobody has ever (since 1988) been released from the programme. If that's true, does it worry you?


In a way, it kinda does. I, too, have a soft spot in my heart for convicted criminals. When their prison term is over, then that should be the end of it.

Although, on the flip side, in many states, one can commit a family member to a psychiatric hospital without said members permission if there is any indication if they are a danger to themselves or the community. This in a way is kinda of an extension of these kinds of policies.
 
2012-06-29 08:17:34 AM

pbjrfym: OMG! We're All Gonna Die!: I still feel that child molesters and pedophiles that are convicted should be tortured slowly and killed by the worst and least expensive means. I can't stop thinking about how terrible and terrifying it must be to be a child and going through that. no mercy for sex offenders. Kill them all.

Sorry if I offended anyone. It's just that I really detest these people.


But that would infringe on his human rights.

And honestly...who deserves their human rights protected more then someone who rapes children?


They are "human" rights. Kiddy diddlers are humans.
 
2012-06-29 08:19:21 AM

RibbyK: Girls from MN said he was kinda funny lookin'
[www.homevideos.com image 274x207]


Go Bears.
 
2012-06-29 08:21:24 AM
This could work in Americas favor. Send all our sex offenders to the UK on "vacation" issue a warrant for their arrest stating they will be put in an sex offenders program and let the UK refuse to send them back, bingo billions in tax money saved and the public safer!
 
2012-06-29 08:25:09 AM

Tat'dGreaser: dittybopper: That you *KNOW* about.

This too, he was only caught twice. Who the f*ck knows how many times he's done this. You have to be completely in-the-clouds naive to believe he only did this twice.


Problem is, both the US and UK are nations where the rule of law still means something. He could have raped hundreds of children, and all that matters is what the State can prove, not what they suspect. If the State can prove he continues to offend, then they should try him for those crimes, but we cannot assume someone is guilty based upon supposition and the predilection to re-offend other pedophiles exhibit. Otherwise we are nothing but a witch-hunting mob.
 
2012-06-29 08:27:26 AM

ransack.: pbjrfym: OMG! We're All Gonna Die!: I still feel that child molesters and pedophiles that are convicted should be tortured slowly and killed by the worst and least expensive means. I can't stop thinking about how terrible and terrifying it must be to be a child and going through that. no mercy for sex offenders. Kill them all.

Sorry if I offended anyone. It's just that I really detest these people.


But that would infringe on his human rights.

And honestly...who deserves their human rights protected more then someone who rapes children?

They are "human" rights. Kiddy diddlers are humans.


INCORRECT. THE "CORRECT" SPELLING OF "HUMAN" IS S-E-X-O-F-F-E-N-D-E-R
NEXT WORD
SPELL. PEDOFILE

www.speaknspell.co.uk
 
2012-06-29 08:27:55 AM

ethics-gradient: So, although the legal system here is far from perfect and as a fellow common law country there is much we can and should learn from the US, I'm not eager to have your legal system over here as quite frankly it seems that large parts of it are shiattily run.


I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment.

I'm intrigued as to which bits we'd want to learn from, but admittedly, I get most of what I know about the US justice system from fark links, Louis Theroux, or documentaries.

I do think we should adopt the bit that allows us to shoot kids with skittles though ;)
 
2012-06-29 08:31:15 AM

Tat'dGreaser: vsavatar: Even though he hasn't done so in over 15 years?

Oh yes you are right. Just because he did it in America .


He hasn't done anything in America unless he is tried for it. Let's face it, the guy fleed and did it in Ireland, so if he had an actual trial he's looking at a 99.99999% chance of being convicted. Pretty simple: get him back, have a trial, throw him in the klink for life.
 
2012-06-29 08:31:45 AM
Sullivan, who has joint Irish/US nationality - who also goes under the name O'Suilleabhain

It's the same name, really. Sullivan is the Anglicized version of O Suilleabhain (which, despite the scary looking spelling is pronounced 'O'Sullivan')

Ah, Irish Gaelic... I love you, but it's no wonder you're a dying language.
 
2012-06-29 08:32:23 AM

KimNorth: This could work in Americas favor. Send all our sex offenders to the UK on "vacation" issue a warrant for their arrest stating they will be put in an sex offenders program and let the UK refuse to send them back, bingo billions in tax money saved and the public safer!


Spot on, chap!
 
2012-06-29 08:32:37 AM

Publikwerks: goatan: They will extradite him as soon as the US offers guarantees that they will follow their own constitution. It's interesting that the constitution seems to no longer be a legal document but a religious one where fanatics (RON PAUL) pick and chose what bits they actually want to follow without realising it is meant to all be followed all the time and for everyone including paedophiles.

Sullivan's lawyer, Ben Brandon, previously told the court no one had been released from the treatment programme, operated by the Department of Human Services in Minnesota, since it began in its current form in 1988.

Well that certainly doesn't sound like that "treatment" programme is a complete failure then nor does it sound like an attempt to deny liberty without due process. Just give him a trial and then lock him up as long as you want. It seems that US government is not convinced he is guilty of what he has been accused and therefore don't want it to go to a trial.

Because some people cannot be treated. If your completely broken, there really isn't much they can do for you other than make sure you don't hurt anyone.

That said, I don't think that would be the case with guy. He wouldn't get bail, he is a flight risk X ∞... So instead of Civil Commitment, he would get remanded to jail where hopefully he would be continuously raped until he died.


oh yes there is no hope for some but 100% failure for something that is supposed to be providing a treatment is very suspicions almost fraudulant. If it was the case that he would go to jail they would have offered the guarantee gladly the fact they haven't is either incompetent arrogant or they know that he would go into the "treatment" programme and don't want to lie in court. I suspect someone is getting rich from this programme at tax payers expense so results don't matter.
 
2012-06-29 08:33:08 AM

ransack.: They are "human" rights. Kiddy diddlers are humans.


...Who violated the rights of other humans by diddling them underage. They forfeit their rights once they have done this.
 
2012-06-29 08:34:08 AM
i111.photobucket.com



i111.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-29 08:35:57 AM

cman: orbister: cman:
It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient.
Whereas in the UK the Mental Health Act makes damn sure that the legal system is involved in any detention. We're picky like that, and don't like locking people up indefinitely without legal recourse. Habeus Corpus, Magna Carta, that sort of thing.

While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.
The BBC claims that nobody has ever (since 1988) been released from the programme. If that's true, does it worry you?

In a way, it kinda does. I, too, have a soft spot in my heart for convicted criminals. When their prison term is over, then that should be the end of it.

Although, on the flip side, in many states, one can commit a family member to a psychiatric hospital without said members permission if there is any indication if they are a danger to themselves or the community. This in a way is kinda of an extension of these kinds of policies.


They still have their day in court, however: You can *TEMPORARILY* commit just about anyone, but in order to keep them in a facility involuntarily for more than a handful of days a court needs to step in and find that they are a danger either to themselves, or to others. The person being committed has a right to be represented by counsel at that proceeding, and to present contrary evidence.

Personally, I *REALLY* dislike the idea of civil commitments after a criminal sentence has been served. That just seems to violate the spirit of the Constitution to me. If a person is that likely to re-offend on release, and needs to be involuntarily committed both to try and reform them, and to protect the public, then that is what they should have been sentenced to in the first place. This whole "Hey, you served your criminal sentence, but guess what? We still think you are a danger so we're going to send you to a mental facility with an open-ended sentence and very limited real ability to appeal the decision, and none of the protections afforded in criminal sentencing" just rubs me the wrong way.

There are appropriate ways to handle that. Pretty much automatic civil commitment after successfully serving a criminal sentence isn't one of them.
 
2012-06-29 08:37:03 AM

Jon iz teh kewl: i think EVERYONE in the world should have to REGISTER as a SEX OFFENDER


Why so you won't stand out?
 
2012-06-29 08:37:24 AM
let them keep him. he's their problem now.
 
2012-06-29 08:38:00 AM

Hydra: They forfeit their rights once they have done this.


Fortunately, it doesn't work this way. Vengeance makes for a really bad system of law.
 
2012-06-29 08:41:13 AM

kitsuneymg: They extradite Assange but not this farker?


Seriously, it is a Farking joke. Although, the whole indefinite thing kind of poses a problem or several.
 
2012-06-29 08:42:43 AM

goatan: oh yes there is no hope for some but 100% failure for something that is supposed to be providing a treatment is very suspicions almost fraudulant. If it was the case that he would go to jail they would have offered the guarantee gladly the fact they haven't is either incompetent arrogant or they know that he would go into the "treatment" programme and don't want to lie in court. I suspect someone is getting rich from this programme at tax payers expense so results don't matter.


I agree their program needs fixing. So do they.
http://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/ped/pedrep/ccso.pdf

Anyway, the reason they didn't offer the guarantee is that they usually don't take options off the table. If they say "Promise you wont execute" they say no, thats not our call.

That's a jury's call.
 
2012-06-29 08:43:42 AM

meanmutton: jodaveki: cman: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.

So in essence, you could be confined for life w/o benefit of a trial. I see.

Only if you're pedantic. There idsa technical difference between a criminal trial and a commitment hearing but you have full due process.


And there's the rub: it's for an indeterminate sentence, which means he could be confined for the rest of his life on the say so of a doctor. Pedantic? Given the viceral reactions we see on the boards wrt cases like these, are we going to wax naïve about what kind of due process is actually available to someone committed for these crimes?
 
2012-06-29 08:43:48 AM
It's not a "choice".
 
2012-06-29 08:44:26 AM

MmmmBacon: Tat'dGreaser: dittybopper: That you *KNOW* about.

This too, he was only caught twice. Who the f*ck knows how many times he's done this. You have to be completely in-the-clouds naive to believe he only did this twice.

Problem is, both the US and UK are nations where the rule of law still means something. He could have raped hundreds of children, and all that matters is what the State can prove, not what they suspect. If the State can prove he continues to offend, then they should try him for those crimes, but we cannot assume someone is guilty based upon supposition and the predilection to re-offend other pedophiles exhibit. Otherwise we are nothing but a witch-hunting mob.


It's not a witch-hunting mob if he hasn't answered for his crimes over here. It's the seeking of justice for crimes already committed. He'll have his day in court, with arguably more protections than he might get in the UK. For example, since rape is purely a state crime, the only real exception to Double Jeopardy in the United States (dual sovereignty by state and federal law) wouldn't apply if he is originally acquitted.
 
2012-06-29 08:46:01 AM
so he's 34 now the "child molesting happened 18 years ago (1994) that means he was 16 and having sex with a 14 year old. i think i saw that 3 times on Jerry springer just last week.
 
2012-06-29 08:46:06 AM
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-06-29 08:48:54 AM

Hydra: ...Who violated the rights of other humans by diddling them underage. They forfeit their rights once they have done this.


In the UK, you might lose some of your rights whilst you're serving a criminal sentence, but your basic human rights are pretty much inalienable.

No, that doesn't mean I'm defending kiddy fiddlers. The justice system has to go with the law, since that's what we ask them to do; And this particular chap has as many Human rights as the next regular guy on the street.
 
2012-06-29 08:49:23 AM

ethics-gradient: Actually I'm pained to admit that seems like a fairly accurate article by the daily mail having read about this on the BBC and The Times.

Obviously he should go to America and face trial, but as he doesn't seem to have offended since he was in his 20s or so and it's now 18 years and he's living with an adult woman later I do wonder what this "America's Most Wanted Sex Criminal" status is about. Being charitable it seems like exaggeration at best.

The problem here is partly that influence on the British system by the European Convention on Human Rights has raised the definition of "Human Rights" to a ridiculous standard.
Secondly a truly halfwitted Extradition Act which Tony Blair signed with the USA because he trusted you guys. More fool him, now it seems that the British legal system can be manipulated by attention seeking local DAs of low moral status who would be lucky to get jobs as cleaning court floors over here and sloppy/dishonest/corrupt federal agencies.

In this particular case my first instinct is to say that the locals in Minnesota should be brought to heel but no doubt there are States Rights issues there so it's not possible.

So, although the legal system here is far from perfect and as a fellow common law country there is much we can and should learn from the US, I'm not eager to have your legal system over here as quite frankly it seems that large parts of it are shiattily run.
And don't get me started on Europe.

OK, rant over.


I agree with a lot of what you say, but 1. we don't know that he hasn't re-offended, and 2. he's married? That's an argument? Sandusky was married and he makes this guy look like a dilettante.
 
2012-06-29 08:50:04 AM

shivashakti: Sullivan, who has joint Irish/US nationality - who also goes under the name O'Suilleabhain

It's the same name, really. Sullivan is the Anglicized version of O Suilleabhain (which, despite the scary looking spelling is pronounced 'O'Sullivan')

Ah, Irish Gaelic... I love you, but it's no wonder you're a dying language.


Indeed, it's a required subject in all levels of school in Ireland up to school leaving age, so about 13 years education. Yet less of the population speaks it now than when we got independence in the 1920s, and the majority leave school actively hating it.
 
2012-06-29 08:51:05 AM

ethics-gradient: The problem here is partly that influence on the British system by the European Convention on Human Rights has raised the definition of "Human Rights" to a ridiculous standard.


Wait... Not having life imprisonment without trial or conviction is a ridiculous standard of human rights?

What I'm reading into it. But then again, I just read the Daily Fail's explanation, so...
 
2012-06-29 08:53:38 AM
What happened to all the FARKers who defend "civil commitment" by saying it's perfectly appropriate for criminals who avoid jail by pleading insanity? Oh, right, suddenly commitment is an abuse of human rights when it's actually used, so we mustn't do that any more.

/can't put 'em in jail because they're crazy, can't put 'em in the asylum because they've got rights
//we blame the victims because they're the only ones we're allowed to punish
 
2012-06-29 08:54:00 AM
Oxygen_Thief : you make solid points and I do not intend to detract from that. However, at least on sexual abuse in my jurisdiction (I cannot speak to Minnesota) there is no statute of limitations on felony sexual assault crimes. What he allegedly did arises to a felony. At least from what I have read on the European Law..he should be returned. I have not found the opinion yet so I do not know on what legal basis the court denied that despite Daily Fails arguments which most likely have nothing to do with the actual law
...so for now I disagree with the British Courts determination. Despite the often over the top rhetoric the United States is not North Korea.


Yes I'd agree that he should be returned, morally at least if not legally too (I'm not an expert). However people can change and the fact that he hasn't (apparently) offended should be taken into account and it seems like Minnesota's system doesn't really do that...

ethics-gradient: So, although the legal system here is far from perfect and as a fellow common law country there is much we can and should learn from the US, I'm not eager to have your legal system over here as quite frankly it seems that large parts of it are shiattily run.

footshot: I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment.
I'm intrigued as to which bits we'd want to learn from....


The heart of the matter for me is the public's concerns and interests being taken into account by the legal system: you guys are way way ahead of us on that I feel, but the legal system with an elected element (including police, prosecutors and judges) needs to be overseen by disinterested professionals of the highest calibre in order to prevent demagogues and incompetents infiltrating it. You guys are way behind us in that respect I feel.
 
2012-06-29 08:54:55 AM
i.dailymail.co.uk
media.tumblr.com
On the phone with Jake, from State Farm.
 
2012-06-29 08:55:23 AM

furterfan: tankjr: Was it really necessary to put McKinnon in an article with baby rapers? farking bullshiat propaganda.

Too farking right...... +1


Yeah, cause one has commited crimes in the US and the UK won't extradite him because they are afraid we might actually punish him for it, and the other........

Oh, wait
 
2012-06-29 08:55:52 AM

Hydra: They forfeit their rights once they have done this.



in·al·ien·a·ble/inˈālēənəbəl/
Adjective:
Unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor: "inalienable human rights".


You either believe in the fundamental principles the nation was founded on or you don't. You don't get to just toss principles aside and pick them up again later when it's convenient for you. That's not how principles work. All the government had to do was ensure that it was going to follow the system of law that is supposedly the bedrock of our society and they refused. It's the United States' fault this guy goes free.
 
2012-06-29 08:58:41 AM

TsarTom: AbbeySomeone: What happened to his wife's chin?

She's English.

 
2012-06-29 09:00:10 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: TsarTom: AbbeySomeone: What happened to his wife's chin?

She's English.


hotlink fail... try two

edge.ebaumsworld.com
 
2012-06-29 09:01:59 AM
If only we can deport all of our criminals...
 
2012-06-29 09:02:17 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: Uchiha_Cycliste: TsarTom: AbbeySomeone: What happened to his wife's chin?

She's English.

hotlink fail... try two

[edge.ebaumsworld.com image 475x350]


Chinchan!

From her nude pics, she does have some nice knockers
 
2012-06-29 09:02:30 AM

KimNorth: Jon iz teh kewl: i think EVERYONE in the world should have to REGISTER as a SEX OFFENDER

Why so you won't stand out?


i just wanna be part of the "in" club that has sex that's all
 
2012-06-29 09:06:22 AM

cman: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.


Not necessarily. States like New Jersey and Kansas provide no articulable standard and leaves it in the hands of DOC officers to "hold over" convicted criminals past their sentence with no standard of review. No judge, no doctor AND no elected official determines their incarceration status.

It is kind of amazing that now those living in Guantanamo bay get a fairer legal shake than those in civil commitment. To say that what happens to these people has anything to do with the law is a joke.
 
2012-06-29 09:08:16 AM
It's a frustrating situation to be sure.

I could say "Hey, he was in this country and broke this county's laws, and should face this countries repercussions," but some countries really have some goofy stuff in terms of their laws and punishments.

Not to mention that hey, if all these folks are saying this practice is wrong, and violates basic human rights, then maybe it's something we need to take a look at, as a modern society. Sometimes an idea isn't good just because it was the law in this country at some point, I'm sure I can find some blacks or women to agree on that point.

Or maybe, it's time we stopped assuming people have basic rights to be a part of a society that they are apparently unable to live in?

So if we fixed the practice of locking up crazy people for life, and maybe raise the bar on what's considered crazy these days. Suggest that perhaps everyone who breaks a law that involves a victim is already somewhat crazy, and their future livelihood depends upon them passing standardized tests. If they pass, they're not crazy, and are hit with the regular laws in force, with no exceptions caused by possibilities of them being "legally insane".

If they don't pass the test two times, they're stripped of their names/identities, and used for organ donation, crash tests, and/or perfume testing. You know, make some money off of them, and make them go away, rather than paying to sustain them for long periods of time, violating their human rights to rape my children, or otherwise interfere with natural selection, etc..

Failing the test twice is an indicator that this individual is not able to function in our society, and that unless personally championed by an individual who is willing to care for them, and ultimately be responsible for them, they no longer have the right to be considered a part of this society.

Then we could send them to any and all countries that decide to take a stance against this. Or help them build rafts or something, and make an attempt to send them to those countries.

yeah, I'm being cold and harsh.. which are two identifiers for reality. so.. welcome to the harsh reality of life, I guess.
 
2012-06-29 09:08:56 AM

DammitIForgotMyLogin: cman: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.

Actually, I didn't, which is why I said "reads to me"

Colour me entirely unsurprised that the Daily Fail is sensationalising another bullshiat argument then.


wtf did they sensationalize? this what they said:


"But lawyers for Sullivan - who has been put on America's most-wanted sex criminals list - said if returned he could be declared 'sexually dangerous' and jailed without trial and with no hope of release...

Under civil commitment, the court was told, someone could be held with no hope of release even though they had not been convicted of any offence.

Lord Justice Moses added: 'I emphasise again that my judgment rests solely on my conclusion that the is a real risk that if extradited the appellant might be subject to an order for civil commitment within Minnesota, and that that amounts to a risk that he would suffer a flagrant denial of his rights.'

He said under the programme: 'There is no requirement that the offences took place recently, nor , indeed, that the misconduct resulted in conviction, provided that the misconduct is substantiated by credible evidence."

pretty f*cking straight forward.
 
2012-06-29 09:09:42 AM
Brilliant. *as long as you promise to treat him with a pat on the head, we'll send him back*
 
2012-06-29 09:10:25 AM
The Eighth Amendment (Amendment VIII) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights prohibiting the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishments. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause applies to the states. The phrases employed originated in the English Bill of Rights of 1689.

After someone has paid their debt to society (prison sentence) is when 'Civil Commitment' kicks in....it is a violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Why are murders let out? How about repeat burglars?
 
2012-06-29 09:13:18 AM

smokinmic: so he's 34 now the "child molesting happened 18 years ago (1994) that means he was 16 and having sex with a 14 year old. i think i saw that 3 times on Jerry springer just last week.


The wife is 34... he is 43. So he was 25 and having sex with a 14 year old. See that on Springer very often?

Link
 
2012-06-29 09:14:41 AM

ferretman: The Eighth Amendment (Amendment VIII) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights prohibiting the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishments. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause applies to the states. The phrases employed originated in the English Bill of Rights of 1689.

After someone has paid their debt to society (prison sentence) is when 'Civil Commitment' kicks in....it is a violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Why are murders let out? How about repeat burglars?



it isn't a cruel or unusual punishment to be held in custody indefinitely.
it is a due process violation.
the 5th amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
 
2012-06-29 09:14:44 AM

vsavatar: Civil commitment does involve the court system, and coming from my old therapist, there is too much pressure from the judges in those cases for the doctors to write unfavorable reports that it is essentially life imprisonment. In one case, the judge and prosecutor double-teamed him when he said that the patient was no more likely to reoffend than any other person. They insisted that he was wrong and demanded that he accept responsibility if the guy ever reoffended. When he refused to accept it, they discarded his recommendation and sent the guy back.


You're nuts.
 
2012-06-29 09:20:22 AM

Ostman: Indeed, it's a required subject in all levels of school in Ireland up to school leaving age, so about 13 years education. Yet less of the population speaks it now than when we got independence in the 1920s, and the majority leave school actively hating it.



And yet, oddly, it's becoming more popular among Irish-Americans....
 
2012-06-29 09:20:28 AM

ChubbyTiger: civil commitment is an unamerican and unconstitutional farce


this
 
2012-06-29 09:20:29 AM

cman: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.


So? It still involves locking someone up forever without convicting them of anything. The fifth amendment to the US constitution states:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Locking someone up on the advice of a doctor, without a trial and conviction, violates this. If you want to deprive someone of liberty, you must first convict them of something. It sounds like there is plenty to convict this guy of.
 
2012-06-29 09:20:45 AM
I mean, it is a due process violation to be held indefinitely without on the mere accusation of pedophilia. or obviously it should be.
of course the legislature passed and obama signed legislation allowing indefinite detention for anyone on this earth who is accused of terrorism violations, so we actually have no due process rights when it comes to terrorism allegations.
this country is f*cked.
 
2012-06-29 09:20:59 AM

Publikwerks: goatan: oh yes there is no hope for some but 100% failure for something that is supposed to be providing a treatment is very suspicions almost fraudulant. If it was the case that he would go to jail they would have offered the guarantee gladly the fact they haven't is either incompetent arrogant or they know that he would go into the "treatment" programme and don't want to lie in court. I suspect someone is getting rich from this programme at tax payers expense so results don't matter.

I agree their program needs fixing. So do they.
http://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/ped/pedrep/ccso.pdf

Anyway, the reason they didn't offer the guarantee is that they usually don't take options off the table. If they say "Promise you wont execute" they say no, thats not our call.

That's a jury's call.


Except they do take options of the table all the time with plea bargains. It's a prosecutors prerogative to be able to offer concessions in exchange for a guilty plea (something i find highly corrupt in its self). if they are saying it's not our call then that's not true. The jury can decide the ultimate punishment but it's the prosecutor who decides what a person is charged with and thus what options for punishment the jury might have.

Also if it actually was the Jurys decision then there wouldn't be a problem. All they have to do is guarantee that he will be properly tried and not just placed it permanent detention on someones whim. If the Jury decide to place him this "treatment" programme fine if a bearucrat (sic) arbitrarily decides to place him on this programme not fine.

That PDF document is further proof of the essential correctness of the courts decision.
 
2012-06-29 09:22:57 AM
Oh well. In a few years when we're throwing political dissidents, insane homeless people, and out-of-season Mexican farm workers all together with vicious criminals into most the most brutal and poorly run for-profit prison system on the planet, you better believe we'll still be claiming to be the world's sole authority on human rights and everything else.
Someone's going to have to stand up to the US eventually, then more will follow until we're finally encircled and destroyed. It's the way of empires.
 
2012-06-29 09:24:24 AM

Silverstaff: How the hell does the UK's mental health commitment work? They don't have involuntary commitment for the criminally mentally ill? If somebody is committing serious offenses because of a mental health problem they don't let Doctors sort it out?


Not for longer than two years at the very most, and subject to legal review.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Act_1983#Civil_sections
 
2012-06-29 09:24:35 AM

cwolf20: Brilliant. *as long as you promise to treat him with a pat on the head, we'll send him back*


nope so long as you agree to follow your own constitution then well send him back.
 
2012-06-29 09:25:02 AM

loki see loki do: vsavatar: Civil commitment does involve the court system, and coming from my old therapist, there is too much pressure from the judges in those cases for the doctors to write unfavorable reports that it is essentially life imprisonment. In one case, the judge and prosecutor double-teamed him when he said that the patient was no more likely to reoffend than any other person. They insisted that he was wrong and demanded that he accept responsibility if the guy ever reoffended. When he refused to accept it, they discarded his recommendation and sent the guy back.

You're nuts.


That's a really brilliant argument against mine! I'm totally defeated! I'll have to keep that one in mind in the future, so whenever anyone says something I don't agree with, all I'll have to say is "You're nuts" and I automatically win.
 
2012-06-29 09:26:37 AM
If you are being incarcerated or deprived of freedom by the State for any reason whatsoever you need to be able to have your day in court.
Commited a crime and the State want's to lock you up? That's a trial.
Have an infeccious disease and the State want's to lock you up agaist your will for compulsory treatment? That's a trial.
Have a dangerous mental illness that makes you dangerous to society and the State want's to lock you up? That's a trial.
Europe just rolls that way, but the "land of the free" does not apparently.
If the US are so certain the guy is guilty and dangerous, just give him his day in court, unless their courts have already been replaced by the media
 
2012-06-29 09:27:05 AM

Oxygen_Thief: However, at least on sexual abuse in my jurisdiction (I cannot speak to Minnesota) there is no statute of limitations on felony sexual assault crimes. What he allegedly did arises to a felony. At least from what I have read on the European Law..he should be returned.


We'd have returned him for trial. We only refused because You People refused to preclude locking him up for life without trial.
 
2012-06-29 09:30:38 AM

pbjrfym:
And honestly...who deserves their human rights protected more then someone who rapes children?


Nobody. That's why they are called "human" rights and not "people we like" rights. If anyone needs his human rights protected by law, it's a child molester.
 
2012-06-29 09:30:43 AM

cwolf20: Brilliant. *as long as you promise to treat him with a pat on the head due process of law, we'll send him back*


If the guy is so obviously a criminal, what's the problem with guaranteeing a trial?
 
2012-06-29 09:33:42 AM

goatan: cwolf20: Brilliant. *as long as you promise to treat him with a pat on the head, we'll send him back*

nope so long as you agree to follow your own constitution then well send him back.


We don't want him back or we'd have agreed to your terms. Enjoy your rape rape. :)
 
2012-06-29 09:33:49 AM
Didn't Canada do this with a serial killer...and then we said, "OK, go ahead and keep him" and they were like...well, let's think this through a bit
 
2012-06-29 09:34:30 AM
i.imgur.com

Hai guise what's going on in this thread... OH ALLAHWD
 
2012-06-29 09:36:45 AM

Hydra: ransack.: They are "human" rights. Kiddy diddlers are humans.

...Who violated the rights of other humans by diddling them underage. They forfeit their rights once they have done this.


Some people really like the word "forfeit", in the context of human rights and rape or murder. Although they never point to any law that says where and when those rights are forfeited.
 
2012-06-29 09:37:18 AM

OMG! We're All Gonna Die!: I still feel that child molesters and pedophiles that are convicted should be tortured slowly and killed by the worst and least expensive means.


So you're OK with people being tortured slowly to death?

Right.

Not too sure I'd like you near my kids either.
 
2012-06-29 09:37:37 AM
Man somehow I added the word "by" after "abused" in the headline and it made no sense. Must be per-coffee hallucination.
 
2012-06-29 09:39:02 AM
And yet they'll extradite Assange for allegedly groping some chick (or whatever it was he did).

Maybe England wants to have first whack at this guy. *shrug*
 
2012-06-29 09:39:14 AM

DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No


Yeah, I agree with the British judges on this one. We set a dangerous precedent with our civil commitment of sex offenders. Some of them are criminally insane and, for the safety of all, they must be committed. But to make a person serve a lengthy prison sentence, with no effort to rehabilitate him/her, and then lock them up for life after their sentence has been served is just wrong, not to mention a burden to society. And state governments have way too much leeway in defining who and what constitutes a "violent" offender. Pedophiles cannot be cured, but they can learn impulse control and to redirect their sexual impulses. We are so freaked out about this issue that we do very little to help pedophiles. Instead, we just throw them in jail and then put them on a sex offender list. Some of the civil commitment programs do attempt to help offenders, but others are just a sham.
 
2012-06-29 09:40:02 AM
Maybe I'm the only one who thought this... but what's up with his wife staying with him?

Am I the only one that thinks that if she's continuing to stay with a guy who rapes kids that she's probably involved too? At the very least she's complicit... but I'd suspect more than that.
 
2012-06-29 09:41:47 AM

doglover: If only the CIA were more like in the movies.

Go to whereever, find this guy, wait three years, pop him in the head with a zip gun, leave the country.


I don't want to kill him. I'd be satisfied with a Dark Knight-esque "extradition" or what the Israelis did to bring back Eichmann. Someone goes over, knocks him out, and flies him home in secret.
 
2012-06-29 09:42:23 AM

eekmale: I read that as "Man raped and abused by 3 MN preteen girls"


I can believe that.
 
2012-06-29 09:42:49 AM

tankjr: Was it really necessary to put McKinnon in an article with baby rapers? farking bullshiat propaganda.


It's why we here at Fark call it the Daily Fail.
 
2012-06-29 09:43:27 AM

Wayne 985: I don't want to kill him. I'd be satisfied with a Dark Knight-esque "extradition"


GET OUT OF MY HEAD
 
2012-06-29 09:45:01 AM

NotSubby: goatan: cwolf20: Brilliant. *as long as you promise to treat him with a pat on the head, we'll send him back*

nope so long as you agree to follow your own constitution then well send him back.

We don't want him back or we'd have agreed to your terms. Enjoy your rape rape. :)

then why try to extradite him in the first place? The US Governemnt got told and now your trying to pretend like you never wanted him back thats pathetic.
Enjoy your kangeroo courts and the violation of your constitution Enjoy the pride you seem to take in your own ignorance of the law. Enjoy being an ITG and crying yourself with fear to sleep at night. yes do indeed enjoy it all.
 
2012-06-29 09:45:03 AM

mongbiohazard: Maybe I'm the only one who thought this... but what's up with his wife staying with him?

Am I the only one that thinks that if she's continuing to stay with a guy who rapes kids that she's probably involved too? At the very least she's complicit... but I'd suspect more than that.


The Night Stalker had quite a few women trying to marry him... after he was convicted and serving his sentence for 13 murders
 
2012-06-29 09:46:42 AM
That's okay, I figure that when the Euro collapses and the Europeans start eating each other, he'll be among the first to be torn apart by the angry mobs.
 
2012-06-29 09:49:55 AM
goatan


then why try to extradite him in the first place? The US Governemnt got told and now your trying to pretend like you never wanted him back thats pathetic.
Enjoy your kangeroo courts and the violation of your constitution Enjoy the pride you seem to take in your own ignorance of the law. Enjoy being an ITG and crying yourself with fear to sleep at night. yes do indeed enjoy it all.


And I hope for the sake of children over there that he doesn't give into temptation and rape more.
 
2012-06-29 09:50:48 AM
"The one sided extradition act"

Seeing as America has 6 times the population of the UK, and seven times the incarceration rate (even if you just take the England-Wales rate, aka the highest), a 7:1 ratio actually sounds pretty damn equitable. If anything, we're getting shafted over here, where's my fair and just 42:1 ratio?

As for the core of the article...It doesn't say specifically, but I'm willing to wager this was one of those mandatory sentencing laws. The US probably wanted to give them their little assurance to work out the deal, but Georgia (or, whatever state's jurisdiction he's subject to) probably has one of those stupid minimum-mandatory laws for sex offenders that every state legislature was crackin out like farts ten years ago.
 
2012-06-29 09:55:16 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: So, rather than agreeing to Britain's demands, and locking that guy up for 50 years after a fair trial, during which we'd know for sure he wouldn't be abusing children, the United States insists on the right to lock him up indefinitely without charges, essentially allowing him to go free since they knew the judges wouldn't go for it. Lovely.



So, rather than agreeing to American demands to turn him over, he's now Britain's problem and poses a very real threat to British citizens. Lovely.


/trials and imprisonment are expensive
 
2012-06-29 09:58:21 AM
Raping 2 little girls just gets you a suspended sentence in Brittain? WTF? Well, the Muslims are slowly taking over that country. Pretty soon if a guy rapes two girls the girls will be stoned to death for being such sluts.

ts2.mm.bing.net
 
2012-06-29 10:04:35 AM

BroncoFan_17: Raping 2 little girls just gets you a suspended sentence in Brittain Ireland? WTF? Well, the Muslims are slowly taking over that country. Pretty soon if a guy rapes two girls the girls will be stoned to death for being such sluts.

[ts2.mm.bing.net image 231x164]


Pssst your ignorance is showing.
 
2012-06-29 10:06:55 AM

goatan: NotSubby: goatan: cwolf20: Brilliant. *as long as you promise to treat him with a pat on the head, we'll send him back*

nope so long as you agree to follow your own constitution then well send him back.

We don't want him back or we'd have agreed to your terms. Enjoy your rape rape. :)
then why try to extradite him in the first place? The US Governemnt got told and now your trying to pretend like you never wanted him back thats pathetic.
Enjoy your kangeroo courts and the violation of your constitution Enjoy the pride you seem to take in your own ignorance of the law. Enjoy being an ITG and crying yourself with fear to sleep at night. yes do indeed enjoy it all.


Why so serious? I actually agree on the need for universal trials by jury, even if the verdict is criminally insane.

Still, I see some potential humour in the idea that we can ship our criminals to the EU and never have to try them. Sorta like using the EU as a penal colony. There's a bit of poetic justice in the idea.
 
2012-06-29 10:12:54 AM

goatan: Well that certainly doesn't sound like that "treatment" programme is a complete failure then nor does it sound like an attempt to deny liberty without due process. Just give him a trial and then lock him up as long as you want. It seems that US government is not convinced he is guilty of what he has been accused and therefore don't want it to go to a trial.



Are you seriously that farking stupid? Mental diseases are generally difficult to "cure" by which we mean regular monitoring, therapy, and support. There's no magic pill that suddenly straightens things out and makes them perfectly normal. Given the severity of the mental disease and the high likelihood of re-offending it isn't surprising that authorities are extremely reluctant to release them.

That said do you honestly think that placing them in a medium/maximum security prison will be better for them? Especially knowing the particular contempt prisoners have for such criminals and the limited availability of any type of counseling?
 
2012-06-29 10:17:20 AM
This scumbag goes free, but they just can't farking wait to extradite Assange.
 
2012-06-29 10:21:46 AM

pxlboy: This scumbag goes free, but they just can't farking wait to extradite Assange.


Assange's extradition proceedings have been going on for a long time now and he isn't facing lifetime incarceration without due process. Specifics: they are the friend of reason.
 
2012-06-29 10:24:59 AM
Gary McKinnon is certifiable. I don't know why he hasn't been put into an institution of some kind. I mean, he hacked into the CIA's computers looking for "little green men." Little. Green. Men. farking Marvin the Martian. Asperger's isn't a mental illness. He's got something else going on, and he should be medicated for it.

As for the choad who's the subject of this article, as abhorrent as it sounds, even child molesters have rights. That's what separates us from countries in the Middle East who whack your hands off with a scimitar if you steal a loaf of bread. If he hasn't been brought to trial in this country for his crimes, he should be extradited and put on trial. Doesn't matter if the UK likes the way we do things or not, he's still a US citizen, and thus is responsible for answering for his crimes in this country.
 
2012-06-29 10:25:03 AM
We need one of our fans who are headed over to the Olympics take a day off from watching badminton, and handle this.
 
2012-06-29 10:31:38 AM
Great Britian is dead... only Londonstan remains.
 
2012-06-29 10:34:46 AM
maybe he should try
Young & Not legal
 
2012-06-29 10:36:58 AM
My wife did her psychology dissertation on pedos and several studies found that once a pedo is caught the victim list is ususally at least 10x what they've caught them for. This is for the young kid type of real pedo not the 17 y/o boys with a teacher type.
 
2012-06-29 10:38:11 AM

GT_bike: My wife did her psychology dissertation on pedos and several studies found that once a pedo is caught the victim list is ususally at least 10x what they've caught them for. This is for the young kid type of real pedo not the teacher w/ 17 y/o boys with type.


FTFM
 
2012-06-29 10:41:07 AM

AbbeySomeone: That's comforting. I wonder why they mistrust this.


THIS.

Civil Confinement is VERY VERY scary. Limited judicial oversight, no due process, no appeal, no bail, no parole, no nothing... just you locked up and drugged into insensibility until some quack pshrink on the state payroll decides to let you go. And because said quack is probably paid by the head, he has a personal financial incentive NOT to release you any time soon.
 
2012-06-29 10:41:51 AM

ethics-gradient: footshot: I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment.
I'm intrigued as to which bits we'd want to learn from....

The heart of the matter for me is the public's concerns and interests being taken into account by the legal system: you guys are way way ahead of us on that I feel, but the legal system with an elected element (including police, prosecutors and judges) needs to be overseen by disinterested professionals of the highest calibre in order to prevent demagogues and incompetents infiltrating it. You guys are way behind us in that respect I feel.


Heh, I'm not one of those guys, I'm one of you guys :P And did you just present your opinion in an eloquent and respectful manner? You're aware this is fark, right? ;)

If "the public's concerns and interests" mean you'd like tougher sentencing? I personally think we strike a reasonable balance in the UK, whereas the attention to public concerns in the US leans more towards punishment than rehabilitation. Lock them up and throw away the key doesn't hold well with me, neither does trial by media, but I'm admittedly a big soft lefty type :)

For a local example, I'd consider the Bulger case. The public interests (as reported by certain elements of the media at least), would be along the lines of "keep them locked up for life, they're evil". I'd question how that serves society in any way, especially given the age of the offenders at the time of the offence. I think too much emphasis can be placed on the public opinion and that sometimes works in contrary to the needs of society as a whole.

All just opinion of course :)
 
2012-06-29 10:43:00 AM

JK47: ...

Are you seriously that farking stupid? Mental diseases are generally difficult to "cure" by which we mean regular monitoring, therapy, and support. There's no magic pill that suddenly straightens things out and makes them perfectly normal. Given the severity of the mental disease and the high likelihood of re-offending it isn't surprising that authorities are extremely reluctant to release them.

That said do you honestly think that placing them in a medium/maximum security prison will be better for them? Especially knowing the particular contempt prisoners have for such criminals and the limited availability of any type of counseling?


In 24 years they haven't released anyone. It isn't a treatment programme, it's a gulag.

John Ronson's book "The Psychopath Test" details some of his meetings with Bob Hare, the man who developed one of the main diagnostic tools used for determining if someone should be committed for psychopathy (sociopathy/antisocial personality disorder).

As you might imagine, Bob Hare is a pretty big fan of the idea that some people need to be committed for their own and society's good, but even he expressed the opinion that the American system abuses the rights of those being detained.
 
2012-06-29 10:44:15 AM
FTFA: "Another example of the one-sided Extradition Act which"

Another example of the unedited Daily Fail article written by a barely literate muppet which
 
2012-06-29 10:44:29 AM

clyph: AbbeySomeone: That's comforting. I wonder why they mistrust this.

THIS.

Civil Confinement is VERY VERY scary. Limited judicial oversight, no due process, no appeal, no bail, no parole, no nothing... just you locked up and drugged into insensibility until some quack pshrink on the state payroll decides to let you go. And because said quack is probably paid by the head, he has a personal financial incentive NOT to release you any time soon.


He raped multiple children, he should be facing the death penalty.
 
2012-06-29 10:46:38 AM

Coco LaFemme: I mean, he hacked into the CIA's computers looking for "little green men." Little. Green. Men. farking Marvin the Martian.



To be fair, that's just the Daily Fail's poetic way of saying he was looking for evidence of the US government covering up evidence of proof of alien life, not ACTUALLY looking for Marvin the Martian or small men who were green and lived on mars. I mean, I think it's silly and pretty damn unlikely, but it's not like it's totally implausible. Our government hides a lot of shiat, and acts with pretty much total impunity when we feel entitle to - which is pretty much always in almost all things.

I simply don't think our government would be competent enough to be ABLE to hide proof of alien contact, not that it wouldn't be a-holish enough to try.
 
2012-06-29 10:53:16 AM
To school the English justice system -

What would happen to him back in the USA is that he would most likely be conivcted of two counts of child molestation (no "Civil commitment" or what ever the hell they think). He would probably be sent to prison on one count and to probation (possibly lifetime) on the other when he was released from prison. This would ensure he received sex offender treatment. If he did not honor his probabtion grant, he would probably be revoke to prison on the second grant.
 
2012-06-29 10:59:30 AM
The guy ran off to another country in order to avoid facing a trial for raping a couple of 11 year old girls. He ran to Ireland, where he was convicted of raping a couple of 12 year old girls.

So he "allegedly" rapes a couple of little girls, ducks the trial and escapes to another country where he's busted for the exact thing he was dodging trial for.

Draconian or not, he *was* convicted under a different court for a crime of the exact same nature, he has committed a crime in the U.S. by not submitting for fair trial and has incontrovertibly demonstrated he is a repeat offender and therefore dangerous. I may be wrong on the U.S. criminal bit since my Interweb lawyering is based on one cup of coffee and general irritability.

So sure, UK, you keep the guy y'all convicted after we couldn't because he ran off to do it again over there.
 
2012-06-29 11:00:22 AM
Americans are often shocked to learn they have a harsher and less fair laws than other countries. That Supreme Court ruling this week to strike down laws requiring mandatory life without parole for juvenile murderers? No other country sentences juveniles to life without parole.

Civil commitment in the U.S. has turned out to be something of a boondoggle. As usual politicians thought it sounded great until they got the bill. Bona fide civil commitment requires medical professionals to actually treat people and help them manage their mental illness. Surprise! That's much more expensive than prison. It's become a question of what is the minimum, cheapest effort needed to make these programs seem legitimate enough that a judge won't call it a sham way to keep people locked up under a bogus pretext. Nobody gets released because the quality of treatment isn't there. It's become de facto life without parole at much higher cost than actual life without parole.

The UK is saving us a lot of money by keeping this guy.
 
2012-06-29 11:03:39 AM

Coco LaFemme: Doesn't matter if the UK likes the way we do things or not, he's still a US citizen, and thus is responsible for answering for his crimes in this country.


Right, right.

Does that logic apply to other countries too? We should be returning political refugees to their countries of origin to face torture and death because, hey, that's their country and they broke the law?

The guy is a scumbag and deserves what he gets, sure, but your logic is awful.
 
2012-06-29 11:04:11 AM
FTA: America's most wanted paedophile

...they're still trying...

newsbusters.org
 
2012-06-29 11:06:00 AM

Nem Wan: Americans are often shocked to learn they have a harsher and less fair laws than other countries. That Supreme Court ruling this week to strike down laws requiring mandatory life without parole for juvenile murderers? No other country sentences juveniles to life without parole.

Civil commitment in the U.S. has turned out to be something of a boondoggle. As usual politicians thought it sounded great until they got the bill. Bona fide civil commitment requires medical professionals to actually treat people and help them manage their mental illness. Surprise! That's much more expensive than prison. It's become a question of what is the minimum, cheapest effort needed to make these programs seem legitimate enough that a judge won't call it a sham way to keep people locked up under a bogus pretext. Nobody gets released because the quality of treatment isn't there. It's become de facto life without parole at much higher cost than actual life without parole.

The UK is saving us a lot of money by keeping this guy.


I'll still take our flawed system over one that has no consequenses for raping children. If he does it again, the parents should sue the UK Gov. for letting him free to rape more children, it will be on their hands.
 
2012-06-29 11:07:04 AM

JK47: goatan: Well that certainly doesn't sound like that "treatment" programme is a complete failure then nor does it sound like an attempt to deny liberty without due process. Just give him a trial and then lock him up as long as you want. It seems that US government is not convinced he is guilty of what he has been accused and therefore don't want it to go to a trial.


Are you seriously that farking stupid? Mental diseases are generally difficult to "cure" by which we mean regular monitoring, therapy, and support. There's no magic pill that suddenly straightens things out and makes them perfectly normal. Given the severity of the mental disease and the high likelihood of re-offending it isn't surprising that authorities are extremely reluctant to release them.

That said do you honestly think that placing them in a medium/maximum security prison will be better for them? Especially knowing the particular contempt prisoners have for such criminals and the limited availability of any type of counseling?


Yes mental diseases can be difficult to cure but they can be cured (not always maybe not even often but 100% failure is unacceptable to anyone who cares how their country is run) and by the schemes own admission they are failing http://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/ped/pedrep/ccso.pdf This is a treatment programme that has treated no one so it is a definite spectacular 110% failure.
There are other treatment programmes that do help some people to return to society this unusually happens whilst they are being punished by society. Ultimately they are failing in there stated aim it is sad your standards are so low as to be nonexistent.
Where did I say he was better off in prison who needs a trial and if convicted sent on to a secure treatment centre that has a chance of working and is subject to legal review. This treatment programme they are talking about is pure unadulterated fail
This "treatment" programme is probably a money making fraud especially as there is no need to be convicted of a crime nor are there any legal reviews, it is complete abuse of due process and unacceptable incompetence but it satisfies the revenge lust for some people so it that's probably why it gets a pass with some.
In summary this treatment scheme is a 100% un-ameliorated failure, and it is an abuse of due process to force someone into without any legal review.
 
2012-06-29 11:09:51 AM
For all those stating that people with 'Mental Diseases' should be locked-up indefinitely without a trial.....homosexuality was once a 'Mental Disease'.
 
2012-06-29 11:13:25 AM
Maybe we should start sending all our child rapers there.
 
2012-06-29 11:14:08 AM

ferretman: For all those stating that people with 'Mental Diseases' should be locked-up indefinitely without a trial.....homosexuality was once a 'Mental Disease'.


Are you trying to equate homosexuality with a "mental disease" that makes you want to rape children?
Both are "born that way" but thats about as far as the comparison goes.
 
2012-06-29 11:14:11 AM

NotSubby: goatan: NotSubby: goatan: cwolf20: Brilliant. *as long as you promise to treat him with a pat on the head, we'll send him back*

nope so long as you agree to follow your own constitution then well send him back.

We don't want him back or we'd have agreed to your terms. Enjoy your rape rape. :)
then why try to extradite him in the first place? The US Governemnt got told and now your trying to pretend like you never wanted him back thats pathetic.
Enjoy your kangeroo courts and the violation of your constitution Enjoy the pride you seem to take in your own ignorance of the law. Enjoy being an ITG and crying yourself with fear to sleep at night. yes do indeed enjoy it all.

Why so serious? I actually agree on the need for universal trials by jury, even if the verdict is criminally insane.

Still, I see some potential humour in the idea that we can ship our criminals to the EU and never have to try them. Sorta like using the EU as a penal colony. There's a bit of poetic justice in the idea.


I see paedophile and how we deal if it as serious subject to be discussed. some things shouldn't be trivialised whilst there actually being discussed. Good humour is obvious as good humour and should not look like a badly made ITG point.
 
2012-06-29 11:14:42 AM

ferretman: For all those stating that people with 'Mental Diseases' should be locked-up indefinitely without a trial.....homosexuality was once a 'Mental Disease'.


Yeah, kiddy diddling is exactly like consensual sex between adults.
 
2012-06-29 11:15:45 AM

ferretman: For all those stating that people with 'Mental Diseases' should be locked-up indefinitely without a trial.....homosexuality was once a 'Mental Disease'.


Claim your free turtle at the door.

images.paulpellerito.com
 
2012-06-29 11:19:45 AM

ferretman: For all those stating that people with 'Mental Diseases' should be locked-up indefinitely without a trial.....homosexuality was once a 'Mental Disease'.


It's either that or a genetic aberration. NTTAWT
 
2012-06-29 11:24:28 AM

goatan: NotSubby: goatan: NotSubby: goatan: cwolf20: Brilliant. *as long as you promise to treat him with a pat on the head, we'll send him back*

nope so long as you agree to follow your own constitution then well send him back.

We don't want him back or we'd have agreed to your terms. Enjoy your rape rape. :)
then why try to extradite him in the first place? The US Governemnt got told and now your trying to pretend like you never wanted him back thats pathetic.
Enjoy your kangeroo courts and the violation of your constitution Enjoy the pride you seem to take in your own ignorance of the law. Enjoy being an ITG and crying yourself with fear to sleep at night. yes do indeed enjoy it all.

Why so serious? I actually agree on the need for universal trials by jury, even if the verdict is criminally insane.

Still, I see some potential humour in the idea that we can ship our criminals to the EU and never have to try them. Sorta like using the EU as a penal colony. There's a bit of poetic justice in the idea.

I see paedophile and how we deal if it as serious subject to be discussed. some things shouldn't be trivialised whilst there actually being discussed. Good humour is obvious as good humour and should not look like a badly made ITG point.


Has fark changed so much?

Look, He's walking free after getting no time in Ireland (yeah I know it's not England) and is now living in the UK. On the face of it, child molestation is fairly trivial in your part of the world; why not have some fun with the subject?

Cuba sent their prisoners to Miami. I think we should do the same. It's cheaper to exile than house them.
 
2012-06-29 11:30:11 AM

ferretman: For all those stating that people with 'Mental Diseases' should be locked-up indefinitely without a trial.....homosexuality was once a 'Mental Disease'.


And they used to be locked up without a trial or at the very best a sham trial. Gulags: the once and future solution to all our problems.
 
2012-06-29 11:34:07 AM
Haha! It's funny becuase the conditions in US prisons would violate the Geneva convention! Ha ha!
 
2012-06-29 11:35:36 AM

JackieRabbit: Assange's extradition proceedings have been going on for a long time now and he isn't facing lifetime incarceration without due process. Specifics: they are the friend of reason.


Assange is facing politically motivated extradition to the U.S. which has a known, acknowledged record of denying any and all rights to anyone who is designated on a list that is not public.

There is utterly no other reason Sweden would fail to give the same guarantees asked for in this case.
 
2012-06-29 11:38:53 AM
Essentially they won't extradite him because the US courts have the option of letting him off easy? That's kind of a strange objection.

ferretman: For all those stating that people with 'Mental Diseases' should be locked-up indefinitely without a trial.....homosexuality was once a 'Mental Disease'.


For all those apparently confused about how involuntary commitment works, it only applies to mental diseases that result in violent or fairly severe property crimes. So unless your homosexuality was causing you to uncontrollably rape little boys this point is completely irrelevant to what's being discussed.
 
2012-06-29 11:45:44 AM

ChubbyTiger: He should have his testicles removed and hung from the highest gate in London as a warning to others. That said, civil commitment is an unamerican and unconstitutional farce. I dislike the outcome, but justice in general must outweigh justice for this one arsehat.


Will you wave like this?

i75.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-29 11:48:03 AM

AntiNerd: JackieRabbit: Assange's extradition proceedings have been going on for a long time now and he isn't facing lifetime incarceration without due process. Specifics: they are the friend of reason.

Assange is facing politically motivated extradition to the U.S. which has a known, acknowledged record of denying any and all rights to anyone who is designated on a list that is not public.

There is utterly no other reason Sweden would fail to give the same guarantees asked for in this case.


What the fark are you talking about?

Sweden hasn't been asked to guarantee Julian Assange will not be locked up indefinitely without trial because no one is alleging that Sweden locks people indefinitely without trial and no-one else is currently seeking to extradite Julian Assange.

If in the future the US were to seek the extradition of Julian Assange, then he has the same right to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights from Sweden as he would in the United Kingdom.
 
2012-06-29 11:54:21 AM

Oxygen_Thief: ethics-gradient: Actually I'm pained to admit that seems like a fairly accurate article by the daily mail having read about this on the BBC and The Times.

Obviously he should go to America and face trial, but as he doesn't seem to have offended since he was in his 20s or so and it's now 18 years and he's living with an adult woman later I do wonder what this "America's Most Wanted Sex Criminal" status is about. Being charitable it seems like exaggeration at best.

The problem here is partly that influence on the British system by the European Convention on Human Rights has raised the definition of "Human Rights" to a ridiculous standard.
Secondly a truly halfwitted Extradition Act which Tony Blair signed with the USA because he trusted you guys. More fool him, now it seems that the British legal system can be manipulated by attention seeking local DAs of low moral status who would be lucky to get jobs as cleaning court floors over here and sloppy/dishonest/corrupt federal agencies.

In this particular case my first instinct is to say that the locals in Minnesota should be brought to heel but no doubt there are States Rights issues there so it's not possible.

So, although the legal system here is far from perfect and as a fellow common law country there is much we can and should learn from the US, I'm not eager to have your legal system over here as quite frankly it seems that large parts of it are shiattily run.
And don't get me started on Europe.

OK, rant over.

you make solid points and I do not intend to detract from that. However, at least on sexual abuse in my jurisdiction (I cannot speak to Minnesota) there is no statute of limitations on felony sexual assault crimes. What he allegedly did arises to a felony. At least from what I have read on the European Law..he should be returned. I have not found the opinion yet so I do not know on what legal basis the court denied that despite Daily Fails arguments which most likely have nothing to do with the actual law
...so for now I disagree with the British Courts determination. Despite the often over the top rhetoric the United States is not North Korea. ...


You know, you're right that we aren't North Korea. But I really, really don't mind if transforming this country's justice system into that of East Germany or pre-1991 Russia is what it takes to execute people like Sullivan, and then his family members just for uttering one single word in his defense (as I believe it should also be a political crime).

Despite it being the Daily Fail, at some point there are some things you cannot exaggerate. Like, you know, what's in the article.
 
2012-06-29 11:55:21 AM

NotSubby: goatan: NotSubby: goatan: NotSubby: goatan: cwolf20: Brilliant. *as long as you promise to treat him with a pat on the head, we'll send him back*

nope so long as you agree to follow your own constitution then well send him back.

We don't want him back or we'd have agreed to your terms. Enjoy your rape rape. :)
then why try to extradite him in the first place? The US Governemnt got told and now your trying to pretend like you never wanted him back thats pathetic.
Enjoy your kangeroo courts and the violation of your constitution Enjoy the pride you seem to take in your own ignorance of the law. Enjoy being an ITG and crying yourself with fear to sleep at night. yes do indeed enjoy it all.

Why so serious? I actually agree on the need for universal trials by jury, even if the verdict is criminally insane.

Still, I see some potential humour in the idea that we can ship our criminals to the EU and never have to try them. Sorta like using the EU as a penal colony. There's a bit of poetic justice in the idea.

I see paedophile and how we deal if it as serious subject to be discussed. some things shouldn't be trivialised whilst there actually being discussed. Good humour is obvious as good humour and should not look like a badly made ITG point.

Has fark changed so much?

Look, He's walking free after getting no time in Ireland (yeah I know it's not England) and is now living in the UK. On the face of it, child molestation is fairly trivial in your part of the world; why not have some fun with the subject?

Cuba sent their prisoners to Miami. I think we should do the same. It's cheaper to exile than house them.


Compared to me you are a Fark whippersnapper do you even know what Rotsky is? Anyway back in my day we used to have some serious discussions and the discussion was usually more interesting than the story but boring trolls ITGs pony posters and others have changed that. and the comments that try to be humorous have mostly become repetitive and derivative with only a handful of individuals like pocket ninja making them worth Reading. Most posts made are variations of the same thing again and again perhaps it's time to change it back bring back vaguely intelligent discussion.
The US government representative could not guarantee that he would receive due process so it would seem that both child molestation and due process are very trivial in your part of the world. If child molestation was taken seriously he would have gladly given the guarantee that they would do the right thing yet he didn't. It seem that keeping a legally, morally and scientifically dubious scheme going is more important to punishing/treating Child molesters.
 
2012-06-29 11:59:39 AM

AbbeySomeone: What happened to his wife's chin?


England. England happened.
 
2012-06-29 12:03:19 PM
Send in Seal Six.

Issue settled.
 
2012-06-29 12:10:30 PM
www.motifake.com

/Too easy....
//Goofy mood today....
 
Heb
2012-06-29 12:11:39 PM

DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No


Quite. I just read about the programme and cannot believe it happens in a democracy. If he's a paedo, put him on trial and sentence him. But a programme that potentially allows life in jail without a trial hearing?

That is farked up.
 
2012-06-29 12:13:08 PM

goatan: Compared to me you are a Fark whippersnapper do you even know what Rotsky is? Anyway back in my day we used to have some serious discussions and the discussion was usually more interesting than the story but boring trolls ITGs pony posters and others have changed that. and the comments that try to be humorous have mostly become repetitive and derivative with only a handful of individuals like pocket ninja making them worth Readingreeding. Most posts made are variations of the same thing again and again perhaps it's time to change it back bring back vaguely intelligent discussion.
The US government representative could not guarantee that he would receive due process so it would seem that both child molestation and due process are very trivial in your part of the world. If child molestation was taken seriously he would have gladly given the guarantee that they would do the right thing yet he didn't. It seem that keeping a legally, morally and scientifically dubious scheme going is more important to punishing/treating Child molesters.


Sorry, pet peeve.

Does that answer your question?

That you think due process is actually trivial is in itself humorous. Sure we do things different and our system has flaws (as all do) but you're painting the US as some sort of NAZI state where the gestapo can detain and shoot you for fun.

Your perceptions of the U.S. are as coloured by the media as our sense of the surrender mon, err French. When I was in Germany, people were convinced that we were having shootings OK corral style in every neighborhood.

As I've stated in my Weeners, you guys are welcome to keep the dude IMO. What shocks and disturbs me is that the Irish let him off after two rapes. To me, that's how rape is trivialized, not my inane comments on the intarwebs.
 
2012-06-29 12:16:33 PM
But Julian Assange is going to be extradited, right?
 
2012-06-29 12:16:51 PM
As much as I despise child molesters, the Civil Commitment law, which can be used for other criminal acts, is essentially a way to toss folks in jail without due process, something the US has violently and angrily protested in other nations for decades.

You also need to consider the fact that this bugger raped two more kids over there and was basically told not to do it again, pinky swear! So apparently they have a whole different outlook on child molesters.

Now, if you mess with a soccer match, they throw you in jail and toss away the key. Priorities, people!

Seriously, though, the Civil Commitment law is scary. Please note also that after the right of a trial by a jury of your peers was violated, the US bastardized Eminent Dominion Laws, meaning your land which could be taken only for the good of the nation can now be taken for the good of a developer and his backers.

A similar law to Civil Commitment, used far back in the 40's and 50's mainly for mental patients, was struck down as being unconstitutional.
 
Heb
2012-06-29 12:17:41 PM

OscarTamerz: The limey cocksuckers have denied extradition on 9 people while we've never denied them their criminals. In addition they released the Lockerbie bomber early. Too bad it's their kids who are going to be the ones paying the price instead of the asswipe liberturds in the government.


Is Limey a generic term for people from all countries in the UK? I thought it was just for the English (and it was the Scottish who released the Lockerbie bomber)

As an aside, there has always been a HUGE doubt over al-Megrahi's conviction. Seems a bit of a stich up, though we'll never now know for sure

Link
 
Heb
2012-06-29 12:24:13 PM

Benjamin Orr: smokinmic: so he's 34 now the "child molesting happened 18 years ago (1994) that means he was 16 and having sex with a 14 year old. i think i saw that 3 times on Jerry springer just last week.

The wife is 34... he is 43. So he was 25 and having sex with a 14 year old. See that on Springer very often?

Link


Not unless Jerry Lee Lewis did a special celebrity guest episode (though I think that was 13 and 22)

Come to think of it we hounded Lewis out of the UK when that came out. Oh how we've changed...
 
2012-06-29 12:27:55 PM
JackieRabbit : Yeah, I agree with the British judges on this one. We set a dangerous precedent with our civil commitment of sex offenders. Some of them are criminally insane and, for the safety of all, they must be committed. But to make a person serve a lengthy prison sentence, with no effort to rehabilitate him/her, and then lock them up for life after their sentence has been served is just wrong, not to mention a burden to society. And state governments have way too much leeway in defining who and what constitutes a "violent" offender. Pedophiles cannot be cured, but they can learn impulse control and to redirect their sexual impulses. We are so freaked out about this issue that we do very little to help pedophiles. Instead, we just throw them in jail and then put them on a sex offender list. Some of the civil commitment programs do attempt to help offenders, but others are just a sham.

I agree, so much so that I think it bears repeating. (My underlining)

footshot :Heh, I'm not one of those guys, I'm one of you guys :P And did you just present your opinion in an eloquent and respectful manner? You're aware this is fark, right? ;)
Oh yeah, I got that. Sorry was in a hurry.

If "the public's concerns and interests" mean you'd like tougher sentencing? I personally think we strike a reasonable balance in the UK, whereas the attention to public concerns in the US leans more towards punishment than rehabilitation. Lock them up and throw away the key doesn't hold well with me, neither does trial by media, but I'm admittedly a big soft lefty type :)
Generally I agree, although a little more punishment in cases with clear victims would deter some of the worst I think.

For a local example, I'd consider the Bulger case. The public interests (as reported by certain elements of the media at least), would be along the lines of "keep them locked up for life, they're evil". I'd question how that serves society in any way, especially given the age of the offenders at the time of the offence. I think too much emphasis can be placed on the public opinion and that sometimes works in contrary to the needs of society as a whole.
All just opinion of course :)


Which I share. However we need to distinguish between what interests the public (public opinion) and the public interest (the needs of society), not something our tabloid press is particularly good at. In my opinion.
 
Heb
2012-06-29 12:31:10 PM

Mouser: That's okay, I figure that when the Euro collapses and the Europeans start eating each other, he'll be among the first to be torn apart by the angry mobs.


When we "start" hating each other?

"Sir Humphrey: Minister, Britain has had the same foreign policy objective for at least the last five hundred years: to create a disunited Europe. In that cause we have fought with the Dutch against the Spanish, with the Germans against the French, with the French and Italians against the Germans, and with the French against the Germans and Italians. Divide and rule, you see. Why should we change now, when it's worked so well?

Hacker: That's all ancient history, surely?

Sir Humphrey: Yes, and current policy. We 'had' to break the whole thing [the EEC] up, so we had to get inside. We tried to break it up from the outside, but that wouldn't work. Now that we're inside we can make a complete pig's breakfast of the whole thing: set the Germans against the French, the French against the Italians, the Italians against the Dutch. The Foreign Office is terribly pleased; it's just like old times.

Hacker: But surely we're all committed to the European ideal?

Sir Humphrey: [chuckles] Really, Minister.

Hacker: If not, why are we pushing for an increase in the membership?

Sir Humphrey: Well, for the same reason. It's just like the United Nations, in fact; the more members it has, the more arguments it can stir up, the more futile and impotent it becomes.

Hacker: What appalling cynicism.

Sir Humphrey: Yes... We call it diplomacy, Minister."
 
2012-06-29 12:43:09 PM
And yet they're express extraditing that kid for copyright infringement, for linking to pirated material he didn't even host.
i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-29 12:45:25 PM

You'd turn it off when I was halfway across: What the fark are you talking about?

Sweden hasn't been asked to guarantee Julian Assange will not be locked up indefinitely without trial because no one is alleging that Sweden locks people indefinitely without trial and no-one else is currently seeking to extradite Julian Assange.

If in the future the US were to seek the extradition of Julian Assange, then he has the same right to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights from Sweden as he would in the United Kingdom.


You should read more. From this page:

Perhaps most disturbingly of all, Swedish law permits extreme levels of secrecy in judicial proceedings and oppressive pre-trial conditions, enabling any Swedish-US transactions concerning Assange to be conducted beyond public scrutiny. Ironically, even the US State Department condemned Sweden's "restrictive conditions for prisoners held in pretrial custody", including severe restrictions on their communications with the outside world.

Also

For several reasons, Assange has long feared that the US would be able to coerce Sweden into handing him over far more easily than if he were in Britain. For one, smaller countries such as Sweden are generally more susceptible to American pressure and bullying.
 
2012-06-29 12:48:03 PM
So I see Britain has sunk to providing safe-havens for Pedophiles as well. Hope you all are proud of yourselves. Don't blame us when all the Pedos here flee convictions to start diddling your kids over there.
 
2012-06-29 12:52:38 PM
where in Ireland did he go? Just wondering.
 
2012-06-29 12:56:46 PM

Moonlightfox: And yet they're express extraditing that kid for copyright infringement, for linking to pirated material he didn't even host.
[i.imgur.com image 320x270]


and Mr. Dotcom didn't even SHARE MUSIC. he just designed the system for doing so.
 
2012-06-29 12:56:58 PM
Sullivan, who has joint Irish/US nationality - who also goes under the name O'Suilleabhain - was given a suspended jail sentence in Ireland in 1996 for sexually assaulting two 12-year-old girls.

WTF, Ireland? You give a suspended sentence for sexual assault of children?
 
2012-06-29 12:59:10 PM

patrick767: Sullivan, who has joint Irish/US nationality - who also goes under the name O'Suilleabhain - was given a suspended jail sentence in Ireland in 1996 for sexually assaulting two 12-year-old girls.

WTF, Ireland? You give a suspended sentence for sexual assault of children?


He must have claimed to be a priest
 
2012-06-29 01:02:42 PM
God Europe sucks. Their laws are so farking stupid.
 
2012-06-29 01:05:57 PM

AntiNerd: You'd turn it off when I was halfway across: What the fark are you talking about?

Sweden hasn't been asked to guarantee Julian Assange will not be locked up indefinitely without trial because no one is alleging that Sweden locks people indefinitely without trial and no-one else is currently seeking to extradite Julian Assange.

If in the future the US were to seek the extradition of Julian Assange, then he has the same right to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights from Sweden as he would in the United Kingdom.

You should read more. From this page:

Perhaps most disturbingly of all, Swedish law permits extreme levels of secrecy in judicial proceedings and oppressive pre-trial conditions, enabling any Swedish-US transactions concerning Assange to be conducted beyond public scrutiny. Ironically, even the US State Department condemned Sweden's "restrictive conditions for prisoners held in pretrial custody", including severe restrictions on their communications with the outside world.

Also

For several reasons, Assange has long feared that the US would be able to coerce Sweden into handing him over far more easily than if he were in Britain. For one, smaller countries such as Sweden are generally more susceptible to American pressure and bullying.


Read it last week; it's a load of speculative horseshiat and in no way addresses the points I noted.

Assange will enjoy the same protections in Sweden as he does in the UK.
 
Heb
2012-06-29 01:10:35 PM

CrappityCrap: So I see Britain has sunk to providing safe-havens for Pedophiles as well. Hope you all are proud of yourselves. Don't blame us when all the Pedos here flee convictions to start diddling your kids over there.


Pfff. Like that's going to happen. Most of you lot don't even have a passport :)
 
2012-06-29 01:15:31 PM

Rik01: As much as I despise child molesters, the Civil Commitment law, which can be used for other criminal acts, is essentially a way to toss folks in jail without due process, something the US has violently and angrily protested in other nations for decades.

You also need to consider the fact that this bugger raped two more kids over there and was basically told not to do it again, pinky swear! So apparently they have a whole different outlook on child molesters.

Now, if you mess with a soccer match, they throw you in jail and toss away the key. Priorities, people!

Seriously, though, the Civil Commitment law is scary. Please note also that after the right of a trial by a jury of your peers was violated, the US bastardized Eminent Dominion Laws, meaning your land which could be taken only for the good of the nation can now be taken for the good of a developer and his backers.

A similar law to Civil Commitment, used far back in the 40's and 50's mainly for mental patients, was struck down as being unconstitutional.


So? I don't care. Throw them in there without due process and trial whatsoever and mock up some paperwork about attempting to "assassinate political leaders" and "threatening the integrity of the State." I was never a huge fan of the Constitution anyway. Gets in the way of actually getting things done.
 
2012-06-29 01:40:03 PM

Hydra: ransack.: They are "human" rights. Kiddy diddlers are humans.

...Who violated the rights of other humans by diddling them underage. They forfeit their rights once they have done this.

Some

rights. We do not become a witchhunting mob, which actually is the problem Britain seems to be having. The 'cure' the US is advocating actually might be snake oil, and hasn't released anyone since 1988. A court ordering someone to go through it is, in fact, a violation of human rights, more so than a finite prison sentence.

We cannot ever lose our humanity, or we become the people we condemn. Worse, actually, because we think we have the high moral ground--and trust me, people who hurt others in the name of good? They're usually capable of much more than your normal sickos.
 
2012-06-29 01:43:28 PM

PsiChick: The 'cure' the US is advocating actually might be snake oil, and hasn't released anyone since 1988. A court ordering someone to go through it is, in fact, a violation of human rights, more so than a finite prison sentence.


This isn't generally a topic I'm terribly familiar with, but that point right there, that it hasn't actually resulted in anyone's release in nearly 25 years, certainly seems damning.
 
2012-06-29 01:45:07 PM
A legitimate use for a drone?

YYYyyyoooowwwwww!! TATATATATATATATAATATAT!
 
2012-06-29 02:10:41 PM

PsiChick: Hydra: ransack.: They are "human" rights. Kiddy diddlers are humans.

...Who violated the rights of other humans by diddling them underage. They forfeit their rights once they have done this.

Some rights. We do not become a witchhunting mob, which actually is the problem Britain seems to be having. The 'cure' the US is advocating actually might be snake oil, and hasn't released anyone since 1988. A court ordering someone to go through it is, in fact, a violation of human rights, more so than a finite prison sentence.

We cannot ever lose our humanity, or we become the people we condemn. Worse, actually, because we think we have the high moral ground--and trust me, people who hurt others in the name of good? They're usually capable of much more than your normal sickos.


AAAAND? I don't see the problem with this. At least they would be mistreated.
 
2012-06-29 02:50:51 PM

MythDragon: [i47.tinypic.com image 306x607][www.filehurricane.com image 494x395]


That's why the British saying is "keep a stiff upper lip".
 
2012-06-29 02:52:45 PM

Heb: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

Quite. I just read about the programme and cannot believe it happens in a democracy. If he's a paedo, put him on trial and sentence him. But a programme that potentially allows life in jail without a trial hearing?

That is farked up.


NotSubby: goatan: Compared to me you are a Fark whippersnapper do you even know what Rotsky is? Anyway back in my day we used to have some serious discussions and the discussion was usually more interesting than the story but boring trolls ITGs pony posters and others have changed that. and the comments that try to be humorous have mostly become repetitive and derivative with only a handful of individuals like pocket ninja making them worth Readingreeding. Most posts made are variations of the same thing again and again perhaps it's time to change it back bring back vaguely intelligent discussion.
The US government representative could not guarantee that he would receive due process so it would seem that both child molestation and due process are very trivial in your part of the world. If child molestation was taken seriously he would have gladly given the guarantee that they would do the right thing yet he didn't. It seem that keeping a legally, morally and scientifically dubious scheme going is more important to punishing/treating Child molesters.

Sorry, pet peeve.

Does that answer your question?

That you think due process is actually trivial is in itself humorous. Sure we do things different and our system has flaws (as all do) but you're painting the US as some sort of NAZI state where the gestapo can detain and shoot you for fun.

Your perceptions of the U.S. are as coloured by the media as our sense of the surrender mon, err French. When I was in Germany, people were convinced that we were having shootings OK corral style in every neighborhood.

As I've stated in my Weeners, you guys are welcome to keep the dude IMO. What shocks and disturbs me is that the Irish let him off after two rapes. To me, that's how rape is trivialized, not my inane comments on the intarwebs.


How is defending due process in every post mean I think it is trivial? If I thought it was trivial I would not have bothered with any of my posts. The whole point of my posts is that Due process is not trivial. Yes the Irish decision is weird but all your doing is pointing over there going look the Irish there the ones who are wrong not me, well you both wrong.

No you don't find it humorous you got called out and are now trying deflect criticism by making untrue statements and trying to pretend my point is the exact opposite of what it is. Please do show where I said the US was Nazi state where people are detained and shot at will and where I said Due Process is trivial.

My perceptions on this particular issue come solely from this thread and there are Americans on both side of the argument so I see it as being pretty balanced there are some like you who are wrong and some like heb who posted above you and they get it.
 
2012-06-29 02:59:23 PM

Titanius Anglesmith: ChubbyTiger: He should have his testicles removed and hung from the highest gate in London as a warning to others. That said, civil commitment is an unamerican and unconstitutional farce. I dislike the outcome, but justice in general must outweigh justice for this one arsehat.

Will you wave like this?

[i75.photobucket.com image 400x225]


Ah, yes. Vir. I loved him.

I went to the rock to hide my face, but the rock cried out "no hiding place"

Here is one solution: Tell England we are not going to lock him up forever. We are going to hold him in a special jail for those accused of such crimes. It is one in which he will not be hurt or abused by inmates or guards. We will hold him at Alcatraz. He only has to stay at Alcatraz for 5 years or 1 year for each of the victims of his crime, whichever is less. If he escapes and makes it to the mainland, then we will put him in jail forever; this makes it up to him how much time he serves.
 
2012-06-29 03:35:39 PM
 
2012-06-29 03:54:02 PM

DammitIForgotMyLogin: cman: DammitIForgotMyLogin: Actually, it reads to be more like:

Britain: Promise that won't lock him up for life without convicting him in a trial first
America: No

You do understand what civil confinement is, dont you?

It does not involve the court system after one is made a patient. While there, the doctors decide when you are good to leave the program.

Actually, I didn't, which is why I said "reads to me"

Colour me entirely unsurprised that the Daily Fail is sensationalising another bullshiat argument then.


No, they have it right this time. The guy is accused of raping 3 girls in the US, and was CONVICTED of raping 2 more in Ireland. I say again: CONVICTED.

Around these parts, that is what is known as a Serial Rapist. Those kinds of people NEED to be locked up for the rest of their natural lives, because they have demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that they WILL keep raping until they are killed or jailed.
 
2012-06-29 04:07:32 PM

thisone: dnrtfa

but if he abused kids in Ireland, how'd he end up in British custody?

Surely the Irish government would be asking for extradition as well as the US?

/are we confusing Ireland with Northern Ireland again?


He was tried, convicted, and eventually released for the crimes he committed in Ireland. He still has yet to stand trial for the 3 rape charges in the US.
 
2012-06-29 04:20:29 PM
Honestly. If Britain wants the guy to be the first tourist attraction to involve beating the shiat out of him whenever a U.S. citizen visits, just say so.
 
2012-06-29 04:21:08 PM
Or whatever other country he shiats in just by existing.
 
2012-06-29 05:05:20 PM

Nem Wan: Americans are often shocked to learn they have a harsher and less fair laws than other countries


Only if they haven't been paying attention.

Then, when they do find out, instead of getting angry, they just shrug and go back to watching Jersey Shore.
 
2012-06-29 05:13:21 PM

Joe Blowme: He raped multiple children, he should be facing the death penalty.


He deserves the harshest penalty allowed by law, AFTER first being accorded a fair and impartial trial by a jury of his peers, the right to challenge evidence and witnesses presented against him, and found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on the factual evidence of the case.

Even if the person is guilty as fark, they are still entitled to due process. That's what makes us a nation of laws and not (yet) a police state where anyone can be deprived of life, liberty, and property on a mere accusation or suspicion.

Innocent until proven guilty. Keep repeating that until it sinks into your thick, vengeful, Neanderthal skull.
 
Heb
2012-06-29 05:33:36 PM

ParaHandy: On the other hand, if you have a powerful enough lobby group, then you can extradite someone who never set foot in the USA, and never broke any UK laws, just for posting some links on the web


Don't think it will happen. Enough cross-party support that I suspect home secretary to refuse to extradite. Trying to extradite a British person for crimes supposedly committed in Britain on a British hosted website used mostly by British people hasn't been seen in very positive terms.
 
2012-06-29 06:11:51 PM

theBigBigEye: PsiChick: Hydra: ransack.:

AAAAND? I don't see the problem with this. At least they would be mistreated.


He's mentally farking ill, numbskull. There might not be a way to treat it, but the fact that you want to enact any form of mistreatment on someone who is seriously sick in the head says a lot about you.

Yes, he should be punished, since we have no other way of dealing with his type of mental illness, but good lord. You're a sane human being. Try and act like it.
 
2012-06-29 06:27:27 PM
Under civil commitment someone could be held with no hope of release even if not convicted of any offence

Aaaaand there's yer relevant sentence right there. Nice Land of the Free you've got there.
 
2012-06-29 06:33:04 PM

Suede head: Under civil commitment someone could be held with no hope of release even if not convicted of any offence

Aaaaand there's yer relevant sentence right there. Nice Land of the Free you've got there.


You biatch and moan if we let the nutcases walk around free and homeless, you biatch and moan when we confine them for proper treatment... what do you expect us to do? Wave a magic wand that eliminates the mentally ill?

/oh, right, Germany is in charge of the EU now
//off to the "showers" then
 
2012-06-29 07:20:53 PM

Psychomancer: To school the English justice system - What would happen to him back in the USA is that he would most likely be conivcted of two counts of child molestation (no "Civil commitment" or what ever the hell they think). He would probably be sent to prison on one count and to probation (possibly lifetime) on the other when he was released from prison. This would ensure he received sex offender treatment. If he did not honor his probabtion grant, he would probably be revoke to prison on the second grant.


Much the same as what would happen here then. But your system could not assure us that he would not face lifetime detention without trial and We Don't Do That.
 
2012-06-29 07:22:54 PM

Joe Blowme: I'll still take our flawed system over one that has no consequenses for raping children. If he does it again, the parents should sue the UK Gov. for letting him free to rape more children, it will be on their hands.


Our system does have consequences. We prefer to have a trial, though, not just lock people up indefinitely because hell, we know they're guilty.
 
2012-06-29 07:24:24 PM

cman: Chinchan!

From her nude pics, she does have some nice knockers




I really hate you for forcing me to look those up. I hope you're proud of yourself asshole!

heh...
 
2012-06-29 07:28:24 PM

NotSubby:
As I've stated in my Weeners, you guys are welcome to keep the dude IMO. What shocks and disturbs me is that the Irish let him off after two rapes. To me, that's how rape is trivialized, not my inane comments on the intarwebs.


He was tried and sentenced in Ireland for sexual assault, not rape. That could cover groping, for example - not good, but not as bad as "rape" rape. The light sentence suggests that his offence was at the lower end of the scale.
 
2012-06-29 07:31:05 PM

JeffDenver: God Europe sucks. Their laws are so farking stupid.


Which one? The one about "due process" and "fair trial" before locking people up? We're quite fond of that one.
 
2012-06-29 07:32:50 PM
America: Police State, Anyone?

;)
 
2012-06-29 07:33:17 PM

Loreweaver:
No, they have it right this time. The guy is accused of raping 3 girls in the US, and was CONVICTED of raping 2 more in Ireland. I say again: CONVICTED.


Where does it say he raped girls in Ireland?
 
2012-06-29 08:06:08 PM

orbister: Loreweaver:
No, they have it right this time. The guy is accused of raping 3 girls in the US, and was CONVICTED of raping 2 more in Ireland. I say again: CONVICTED.

Where does it say he raped girls in Ireland?


FTFA:

"Sullivan, who has joint Irish/US nationality - who also goes under the name O'Suilleabhain - was given a suspended jail sentence in Ireland in 1996 for sexually assaulting two 12-year-old girls."
 
2012-06-29 08:19:07 PM

Indubitably: America: Police State, Anyone?

;)


P.S. I'm not surprised they won't extradite him; perhaps if we were less Police State, Anyone, we might be able to prosecute this man for his REAL crimes.
 
2012-06-29 10:04:09 PM

relcec: Under civil commitment, the court was told, someone could be held with no hope of release even though they had not been convicted of any offence.


Technically true; HOWEVER, there still needs to be a trial that determines that the individual is a substantial risk to himself or others due to mental illness. Normally these are 'bench' trials without a jury, but the decision is still appealable.
 
2012-06-30 12:48:05 AM

NotSubby: I could give a crap if the UK wants to keep our sex offenders but WTF is with Ireland giving this guy his walking papers after raping 12yo girls?


Reading comprehension is a really big problem in America, isn't it? I guess that's why so many of you can't stick to your Constitution or Bill of Rights; even when you've read them, you don't understand them.

If all the articles are accurate he was convicted of 'sexually assaulting' the girls, not raping them. Rape and Sexual Assault are different crimes. Rape is not a subset of Sexual Assault, they are completely different crimes.

Since he wasn't convicted of Rape or Aggravated Sexual Assault all we know is 1. no penetration of any orifice at all (rape) and 2. no serious violence (aggravated).

I tried to find information on his actual crime and came up with nothing. For all we know he grabbed their butts over their clothes. He could have waggled his dick at them. Who the hell knows.

Also I'm suspicious of them calling him a paedophile; 35% of child molesters are not paedophiles, and non-paedophiles commit only about 5-10% of sexual crimes against children.

Who diagnosed him as a paedophile i.e. incurable preferential offender as opposed to a regressed situational offender? Just seems like a deliberately inflammatory choice of words.
 
2012-06-30 01:16:57 PM

shivashakti: Ostman: Indeed, it's a required subject in all levels of school in Ireland up to school leaving age, so about 13 years education. Yet less of the population speaks it now than when we got independence in the 1920s, and the majority leave school actively hating it.


And yet, oddly, it's becoming more popular among Irish-Americans....


Cool, thanks for sharing!
I had no idea anyone outside of Ireland (and Canada strangely enough) taught Irish in schools.
 
2012-06-30 01:26:42 PM

Ostman: Cool, thanks for sharing!
I had no idea anyone outside of Ireland (and Canada strangely enough) taught Irish in schools.


Speaking of Irish spoken in Canada, there was even a Newfoundland Irish dialect due to the large Irish population they had there for years.

Newfoundland Irish
 
Displayed 248 of 248 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report