Not to mention just plain disgusting.CoconutBlitz wrote:
That is so evil, disrespectful, immoral, and wrong. I can't quite fathom the correct place to start on appropriate justice for that crime. That is truly the bottom dregs of sub-human behavior.
LOL do you think that when they die, someone will remember this and try to sex their bo- ... corpse up? Fuck thats gross.
noice 
mmmmm... necrophilia....mmmm
Oh sorry, hadn't noticed they stopped being human when they made a mistake. If everyone that made a poor judgement call or had a weird fetish was killed? Well, you and I probably wouldn't be here right now.lowing wrote:
If you hold value in those mother fuckers lives then you are pretty fuckin' far out there jonsimon.jonsimon wrote:
Funny, I think people who hold such little value in life shouldn't be allowed to walk among us, let alone be given a weapon by the government.lowing wrote:
Do you honestly think I consider this crime an economic issue. I said that because I am indifferent to his worthless life, and his life isn't even worth money, let alone, moral value.
I have to agree with Jonsimon, while it is entirely regrettable that they weren't charged and appropriately punished, vigilante justice and calls for cruel and unusual punishment are very easy to throw about and far harder to live with. The justice system exists for a very good reason and hopefully this particular loophole will now be closed, but surely they could've been charged with public indecency or desecration of a grave or something.
Well uh... disrespectful, immoral, wrong, disgusting yes. Horrible really. But I wouldn't wish death on these guys, I think they're just mentally ill.
you guys raise valid points, but please note:<BoTM>J_Aero wrote:
I have to agree with Jonsimon, while it is entirely regrettable that they weren't charged and appropriately punished, vigilante justice and calls for cruel and unusual punishment are very easy to throw about and far harder to live with. The justice system exists for a very good reason and hopefully this particular loophole will now be closed, but surely they could've been charged with public indecency or desecration of a grave or something.
[*] the punishment would be fitting to the crime - debatable, yes, but death would be reserved for the worst. if it was my family: death.
[*] urban justice only exists in absence of our legal system- not as a supplement.
Exactly. While they are not punishable for necrophilia, certainly there are felonies or misdemeanors for trespassing, theft, or destruction of property. And at the very least, the family could sue them in civil court for emotional damages.<BoTM>J_Aero wrote:
I have to agree with Jonsimon, while it is entirely regrettable that they weren't charged and appropriately punished, vigilante justice and calls for cruel and unusual punishment are very easy to throw about and far harder to live with. The justice system exists for a very good reason and hopefully this particular loophole will now be closed, but surely they could've been charged with public indecency or desecration of a grave or something.
all true - but no felonies.jonsimon wrote:
Exactly. While they are not punishable for necrophilia, certainly there are felonies or misdemeanors for trespassing, theft, or destruction of property. And at the very least, the family could sue them in civil court for emotional damages.
also, how could they sue for emotional damages if they were not guilty of a crime?!
the real question: does the law, at the time the 'crime' was committed, give adequate and appropriate punishment and justice to those deserving?
edit: wording.
Last edited by CoronadoSEAL (2007-08-05 11:27:17)
The civil suit wouldn't require them to be convicted of anything. Had they dug up her grave they could be sued for damages.CoronadoSEAL wrote:
all true - but no felonies.jonsimon wrote:
Exactly. While they are not punishable for necrophilia, certainly there are felonies or misdemeanors for trespassing, theft, or destruction of property. And at the very least, the family could sue them in civil court for emotional damages.
also, how could they sue for emotional damages if they were not guilty of a crime?!
the real question: does the law, at the time the 'crime' was committed, give adequate and appropriate punishment and justice to those deserving?
edit: wording.
Whether or not the law provides adequate punishment depends on how far they got. The article suggests that the dug up the grave, but the cops arrived before any further damage was done. If they pay a good fine I believe they have recieved acceptable punishment. Had they gotten further I would like to have seen them sentenced some harsher punishment, such as a short sentence in prison or probation.