Quote:
Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington
First of all I thought that this man had received a minimum sentence of 35 years with no maximum stated.
And Rosebud, yes people do cite differing things to explain away their behaviour. This man said he was too drunk to know what he was doing.
Forgive me if I am wrong but I thought that if he were so drunk he would not have been physically capable of raping this baby.
Personally I think he was just using drink as an excuse. Denial isn't only a river in Egypt.
|
1. You are completely right- The offender in this case is using the excuse- ie "I was drunk" as a means of denying responsibility- "It wasnt me it was the drink" well of course it was him, it was his choice. Challenging this neutralisation is the only way to ensure he confronts the reality of his actions.
2. The point was made earlier that the death penalty saves the taxpayer money- in reality it doesnt due to the extremely high cost of appeal after appeal. It might also be important to quantify what we mean by cost- There certainly are financial considerations but what about the moral cost to our society.
3. Blazey is right in her assessmnet that the majority of the public (in every poll undertaken to date but I recognise none of these are on the scale of a national referendum) do not want to see a return to capital punishment.
and finally
4. Less- I would not dream of trying to educate you as this is far beyond my ability. Dont teach Grandma to suck eggs etc.