Crime and Punishment - Page 4 - Politics and Society -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

Here is a difference in the way that adult cases and juvenile cases are handled, at least philosophically. The chief principle in adult cases is that criminals be punished for their crimes. The chief principle in juvenile cases is "the best interests of the child." There is more of an emphasis on rehabilitation in juvenile cases than there is in adult cases. In reality, I feel that the best interest stuff is complete nonsense, and is often used as a pretext to completely screw up a kid's life. If you are potentially going to prison, then everybody knows to takes things seriously. If you are going to a juvenile program, there is this notion that you are sending a kid to a summer camp where they can be molded into a model citizen. It makes it really easy for the judge to say "guilty" on borderline cases which no reasonable jury or even a judge would say guilty, as they would feel that it was in the kid's best interests to send them to these programs.

I mentioned this before, but those juvenile programs are usually worse than adult prisons. The security is tighter and there is much more violence between inmates than in adult prisons. I once had to visit a juvenile client in one of those programs. It was right across the street from the county jail, but blocked by some other buildings so you would never know it was there. The security at the juvenile program was many times stricter than the jail. The juvenile program had a twenty foot fence with razor wire everywhere to be seen, similar to the maximum security prison we have in our state. The adult jail across the street had some areas with short fences and some barbed wire, but it was no where near as strict or as secure as the juvenile program. Every once in a while, I would have kids sent to jail from the juvenile programs, and they would BEG me to let them plead to as much jail time as they could at the adult jail so they would be away from the juvenile programs.

Yeah man. Those places are usually known to the inmates as "gladiator schools". "Program" is very much a euphemism in this case, they are prisons like any other, just with more violence, as you point out. Some of the stories coming out of those places in e.g. Florida are pretty horrific. The gangs literally torture new non gang-affiliated inmates when they arrive, sometimes causing lifelong damage and even death on a few occasions, and the guards let it happen.

Last edited by d2_e4; 12-30-2023 at 02:09 PM.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 02:05 PM

#77

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonkJr

We can imagine a world in which the best posible process has no difference between trial as adult and trial as a child. In that null case my point would still be correct but ok we could not bother.

I see no reason to assume we live in anything like that world. But maybe it's an aspiration.

I also a proponent of prison reform - both adult and juvenille (which should very much still be different). Isn't specific enough for some but I'd make it illegal to imprison anyone unless reasonable standards of safety/etc are met.

Last edited by chezlaw; 12-30-2023 at 02:11 PM.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 02:07 PM

#78

washoe

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2019 Posts: 8,385

Quote:

Originally Posted by corpus vile

Yes washoe, she did. Just like your buddy Holtzclaw.

Well guess what, I think shes innocent.

what about that doctor that I showed you? the one that says shes innocent? Youre wrong about both cases. you couldnt be any wronger.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 02:08 PM

#79

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,171

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

We can imagine a world in which the best poisible process has no difference between trial as adult and trial as a child. In that null case my point would still be correct but ok we could not bother.

I see no reason to assume we live in anything like that world. But maybe it's an aspiration.

Light on the specifics as always, eh, chez? You're basically that clueless middle manager who comes swanning in wanting the moon on a stick, and leaving the details for us engineers to work through.

You might want to respond to my request in the mod thread btw.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 02:10 PM

#80

washoe

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2019 Posts: 8,385

corpus how come reddit thinks shes innocent?

https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceLucy...etby_innocent/

https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceLucy...y_is_innocent/

Last edited by washoe; 12-30-2023 at 02:34 PM.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 02:16 PM

#81

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

Quote:

Originally Posted by d2_e4

Light on the specifics as always, eh, chez? You're basically that clueless middle manager who comes swanning in wanting the moon on a stick, and leaving the details for us engineers to work through.

The right amount of specifics. I'm definitely someone who thinks the engineers/etc should work out the details.

Who the **** else is going to do it?

Quote

12-30-2023 , 02:19 PM

#82

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,171

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

The right amount of specifics. I'm definitely someone who thinks the engineers/etc should work out the details.

Who the **** else is going to do it?

Yeah, specifically, you want the moon. On. A. Stick. What's so hard to understand? Get to work, guys!

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:18 PM

#83

corpus vile

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 6,321

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

If we mean without the possibility of release then yes I'm really against

Maybe some people, should never be released but that's different.

Yes that's absolutely what we mean. How is it different? If some people "should never be released", then why release them? You really think that NZ Mosque shooter should be released? Or a thousand other 'orrible cu... people for whom rehabilitation just isn't an option?

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:20 PM

#84

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,171

Quote:

Originally Posted by corpus vile

Getting too specific now, bro. Chez is an ideas guy, not a details guy. That's for us plebs to work out, using his insight as a guiding light.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:21 PM

#85

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

Quote:

Originally Posted by corpus vile

It is very different. Rehabillitation should be the aim. Sometimes it will fail

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:22 PM

#86

corpus vile

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 6,321

Quote:

Originally Posted by washoe

corpus how come reddit thinks shes innocent?

https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceLucy...etby_innocent/

https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceLucy...y_is_innocent/

Who gaf? Since when did reddit and the opinions of its motley of armchair detectives supersede the findings of a court of law? Since never that's when. I've been to the Letby science/She's really innocent reddit sub and some of the posters there are creepy af and are probably hybristophiliacs. Others probably had run ins with the law and are biased against the police etc. Whole lotta reasons, none of them more valid than the findings of a criminal trial. You know how long her trial was? You seriously saying reddit uncovered things her extremely long and thoroughly meticulous trial didn't?

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:23 PM

#87

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,171

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

That would be a reasonable point but it isn 't true. D2 is lying or mistaken.

What now? DonkJr's post to which you responded preceded my post where I said anything about your views on prison reform - my post was in response to his lol. I guess your understanding of the linearity of cause and effect could use some work as well.

Also, I am neither lying nor mistaken, I can quote you saying the exact thing I said you did if you like?

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:29 PM

#88

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

donk used it an example of the general.

You can grasp that if you try.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:30 PM

#89

corpus vile

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 6,321

Quote:

Originally Posted by washoe

Well guess what, I think shes innocent.

Quote:

what about that doctor that I showed you? the one that says shes innocent? Youre wrong about both cases. you couldnt be any wronger.

Oh well if some doctor says she's innocent and a weirdo like Michelle Malkin thinks Danny boy didn't rape all those women then maybe I've been all wrong on this whole prioritising the findings of courts over armchair commentators on the internetz thing...

Washoe have you ever read something on the internet you didn't believe immediately and completely uncritically? Or at least thought "hmm, that seems a bit dodgy"? I find this aspect of you fascinating, I gotta say.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:36 PM

#90

57 On Red

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 5,785

Quote:

Originally Posted by washoe

corpus how come reddit thinks shes innocent?

https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceLucy...etby_innocent/

https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceLucy...y_is_innocent/

Reddit is not a reliable source. Letby's guilt is a fact in law and she herself admitted it in writing.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:37 PM

#91

corpus vile

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 6,321

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

It is very different. Rehabillitation should be the aim. Sometimes it will fail

How tf can a serial killer or mass shooter be rehabilitated and why and indeed how would rehabilitation even be an option for such types? Some crimes by their very nature warrant a life without parole sentence where the safety of society is prioritised over offenders for whom rehabilitation isn't possible and whose crimes outweigh any such option anyway. So what do you mean by rehabilitation? Do you favour that option for such very specific offenders?

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

...that doesn't even mean anything.

Last edited by corpus vile; 12-30-2023 at 03:49 PM.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:45 PM

#92

57 On Red

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 5,785

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

If we mean without the possibility of release then yes I'm really against

Maybe some people, should never be released but that's different.

In UK law there is always a possibility of release on compassionate grounds, which is why UK whole-life terms are acceptable under the European Convention as presently interpreted by the ECHR.

There have been a few notorious cases of lifers released on licence who have promptly re-offended and had to be recalled to prison.

If you grant that 'some people should never be released' (and Ian Brady would be an obvious example, and, despite the naive views of Lord Longford, who I once ran into in the cloakroom at the Reform Club while collecting my coat, Myra Hindley would probably be another example) I'm not sure why that's 'different'.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 03:50 PM

#93

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

Quote:

Originally Posted by corpus vile

How tf can a serial killer or mass shooter be rehabilitated and why and indeed how would rehabilitation even be an option for such types? Some crimes a life without parole sentence where the safety of society is prioritised over offenders for whom rehabilitation isn't possible and whose crimes outweigh any such option anyway. So what do you mean by rehabilitation? Do you favour that option for such very specific offenders?

I dont know. But I do know that we dont know that they can't be.

If they're not then it may be impossible to release them

Quote:

...that doesn't even mean anything.

It does. It's part of the argument that it's mistake to demand substantive differences in how children and adults are (or will be) treated before we decide they should be considered differently.

It should be so obvious that it doens't need saying. So obvious that it can appear meaningless/pointless. However here we are..

Quote

12-30-2023 , 04:07 PM

#94

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

Quote:

Originally Posted by 57 On Red

I would return to more grounds.

I dont think brady or hindly would have met them but I'm no expert. Hindly at least wasn't given a whole life sentence until several decades had past from the original sentence.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 04:14 PM

#95

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

Quote:

Originally Posted by corpus vile

Jasus you did it again. That's just gibberish. Empty waffle that doesn't actually mean anything.

I don t know which bit you can't grasp. Let's try this:

Quote:

Flouting the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Vinter v UK, the UK Court of Appeal has held that whole life sentences do not violate Article 3 ECHR (R v McLoughlin – see Neil Shah’s blog post from earlier last week). This post explains why the Court of Appeal decision is wrong and why it matters.

Article 3 ECHR prohibits inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment. The ECtHR held that UK sentencing law permitting whole life orders violates Article 3 because it does not allow for any real possibility of review. As the law currently stands, the only prospect of release for a whole life prisoner is ‘under compassionate grounds in exceptional circumstances’. In reality this means only if such a prisoner is severely physically incapacitated or terminally ill.

Does this fit with the requirement of a review of imprisonment to determine whether it continues to serve a legitimate penological purpose? No. In such circumstances, would allowing a prisoner to die on the outside, rather than behind prison walls, constitute a meaningful prospect of release, sufficient to satisfy the prohibition on inhuman and degrading treatment? No. Does the current UK law, as recently upheld by the Court of Appeal, comport with the basic standards of respect for human dignity which underlie the spirit of the human rights obligations accepted by the UK under the ECHR? No.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeal’s decision to flout the ECtHR jurisprudence on whole life sentences is wrong. It denies minimalist procedural protection for a substantive right of fundamental importance.

To be entirely clear: people still can, and should, be imprisoned for a very long time for very serious crimes. That imprisonment can and, in many cases, will last until the end of such prisoners’ lives. All that Vinter said was that imprisonment must be reviewed after lengthy periods. We cannot throw away the key. To do so constitutes inhuman and degrading treatment. The availability of review does not deny the seriousness of the crimes which these people committed. All it does is preserve the bare minimum of the basic rights afforded to all human beings.

https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/throwing-a...urt-of-appeal/

Quote:

"The whole-life tariff is against all principles of international law as it denies any possibility of reform of rehabilitation," says Bhatt Murphy's Simon Creighton, the solicitor representing the prisoners at the European court.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012...e-human-rights

Quote

12-30-2023 , 04:16 PM

#96

57 On Red

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 5,785

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

I dont know. But I do know that we dont know that they can't be.

If they're not then it may be impossible to release them

It does. It's part of the argument that it's mistake to demand substantive differences in how children and adults are (or will be) treated before we decide they should be considered differently.

It should be so obvious that it doens't need saying. So obvious that it can appear meaningless/pointless. However here we are..

In the UK, under-21s, let alone under-18s (such as Girl X and Boy Y in the Brianna Ghey case) can't be sentenced to whole-life terms. 18-21s convicted of murder get 'custody for life' and under-18s get 'detention at His Majesty's pleasure', which both carry the possibility of parole. The 'starting point' guidelines for minimum sentence before parole are 15 years for 18-21s and 12 years for under-18s. These can be revised down as well as up by the sentencing judge according to various factors.

https://www.defence-barrister.co.uk/life-sentences

Quote

12-30-2023 , 04:20 PM

#97

57 On Red

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 5,785

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

I don t know which bit you can't grasp. Let's try this:

https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/throwing-a...urt-of-appeal/

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012...e-human-rights

That's legal argumentation but does not represent the actual state of the law.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 04:22 PM

#98

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

Quote:

Originally Posted by 57 On Red

That's legal argumentation but does not represent the actual state of the law.

I know. I think the law is bad. Specifically but in way limited to, trying children as adults and whole life sentences.

On the later a very significant court agreed which should make even the most ridiculous posters realise there is a real issue.

Quote

12-30-2023 , 04:26 PM

#99

corpus vile

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 6,321

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

I don t know which bit you can't grasp. Let's try this:

https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/throwing-a...urt-of-appeal/

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012...e-human-rights

How about you just answer my bloody question? Should serial killers and the likes of the NZ Shooter and Breivick be paroled? Yes or no??

Quote

12-30-2023 , 04:28 PM

#100

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,171

Quote:

Originally Posted by corpus vile

How about you just answer my bloody question? Should serial killers and the likes of the NZ Shooter and Breivick be paroled? Yes or no??

You want chez to give a straight answer to a question you posed? Lol, sweet summer child, gl.

Best you might get out of him is some waffling about how you're asking the wrong question, and here is an answer to a much easier question, which is what you should have been asking.

Quote

Page 4 of 14

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 4 of 14

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Last