Poll: Woman cuts man's penis with boxcutter - gets no jail time

[MeatMachine]

Before I even share this headline, let me preside by saying that, for now, don't mainly care about gender inequality/misrepresentation or any other "bigger picture" issue that this topic may or may not pertain to. I'm not going to ask that people quell their discussions about what they see as relevant or important to this and "stay on topic" simply because I personally am more disgusted by one particular issue surrounding this case. There is a lot to think about here, and evidently, what many people consider to be the primary issue differs greatly. In fact, it is BECAUSE of that that I present the following:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/10/woman-cuts-mans-penis_n_6134566.html?utm_hp_ref=crime
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/ind-woman-box-cutter-teen-penis-avoids-jail-article-1.2007685

Basically, the mother of a woman and her 18-year-old boyfriend suspects that the man molested her 2-year-old son. Understandably perturbed by her suspicion (and yes, JUST her suspicion) after getting high, she teamed up with two others, and trapped the man in a trailer for 3 hours, mutilating his genitals "so that he would see a scar every time he had sex", forcing him to choose between "his life or his penis".

-

Harkening back to what I said earlier about the variety in ways that people are responding to what has happened, here's what REALLY eats me: people are not only defending her actions, they are actually APPLAUDING her. My take on this issue is this: Extreme, violent, draconian human rights violations should never be congratulated, rewarded, or lauded under any circumstances. Immediate self defense or immediate defense of others is not a platform to justify aggravated assault with a deadly weapon - they are two entirely separate scenarios. She was not defending the life and welfare of her son from an impending attacker - she trapped and mutilated a helpless victim because she was, by her own admittance, fueled by rage, grief, and at least one mind-altering substance. I understand that it it can be tempting to damn away any civil treatment of a [alleged] child molester, but for Christ's sake, the right to fair trial is one of the cornerstones of any society that respects rule of law for a good reason, and NOT simply because he "may have been innocent".

For anyone who actually thinks what happened to that 18-year-old man is an intrinsically good thing, I sincerely implore you to critically rethink your ethical mindset. You fucking savages.

Had some roles been reversed, and I had a son who I suspected was getting molested by some creep, I could easily imagine myself flying off the handle and torturing the shit out of the guy I thought was responsible for it. And it would -feel- like justice to me, ESPECIALLY if he was not convicted and I was absolutely convinced he was guilty. However, being centrally involved in the experience does not make frontier justice a true substitute to actual justice, even if actual justice is not properly implemented... no matter how bad it feels.

Anyway, what does everyone else think about this whole thing? I tacked on a pole, pretty much so I could quantify opinions regarding the issue I find most troubling. If the options or wording sucks, I apologize.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Vigilantism is a poor substitute for justice, though sometimes it's all there is. But, if you were to follow that logic, you could wait and see if the police cared, and not be high when deciding this sort of thing.

 

[Queen Michael]

"Vela later told police she became suspicious after smoking marijuana, and may have ingested other drugs before the attack..."

If anybody still thinks her actions were reasonable after reading this, then those people can leave now and not come back, please.

 

[Erttheking]

"Vela later told police she became suspicious after smoking marijuana, and may have ingested other drugs before the attack..."

If anybody still thinks her actions were reasonable after reading this, then those people can leave now and not come back, please.

Yeah, it does sound like she wasn't in her right mind. If you're under the influence...well...I think a few years in prison would be the right course of action. Only a few because I'm fundamentally against extremely long prison sentences

 

[Thaluikhain]

Huh...her name is "Vela", like the scary female supernatural entity called a Vela or Vila?

 

[MeatMachine]

"Vela later told police she became suspicious after smoking marijuana, and may have ingested other drugs before the attack..."

"...may have ingested other drugs before the attack..."

"...may have..."

From what I can gather from those two particular words, she basically admitted that she was so fucked up at the time, she literally can't remember the specifics of what she did to HERSELF, let alone her victim.

 

[Thaluikhain]

"Vela later told police she became suspicious after smoking marijuana, and may have ingested other drugs before the attack..."

"...may have ingested other drugs before the attack..."

"...may have..."

From what I can gather from those two particular words, she basically admitted that she was so fucked up at the time, she literally can't remember the specifics of what she did to HERSELF, let alone her victim.

Depends, it could be interpreted that she confessed to the marijuana, but is suspected to have taken other stuff she isn't talking about.

 

[MeatMachine]

"Vela later told police she became suspicious after smoking marijuana, and may have ingested other drugs before the attack..."

If anybody still thinks her actions were reasonable after reading this, then those people can leave now and not come back, please.

Yeah, it does sound like she wasn't in her right mind. If you're under the influence...well...I think a few years in prison would be the right course of action. Only a few because I'm fundamentally against extremely long prison sentences

Thing is, I am actually against the whole "TOUGH ON CRIME" mentality. That's not to say that crime should be taken lightly -it absolutely SHOULDN'T- but that slamming criminals with the largest, hardest sentences is rarely the best thing to do for everyone involved. It's all case by case, of course; I wouldn't compare treating a clumsy, one-time purse-snatcher moderately to taking it easy on a serial murderer/rapist/cannibal with nearly irrefutable evidence against him, but I think too often people focus ENTIRELY on the punishment aspects of prosecution and totally disregard the REFORMATIVE aspects of prosecution. One of the many names for a prison is a "Correctional Facility" for a reason.

 

[Mezahmay]

I'm inclined to say both parties were treated unjustly, but neither article seems to be talking about what treatment the guy is receiving. I take it his physical injuries were treated according to the Indianapolis Star article. Her sentence is far too short for what occurred regardless.

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

Nowhere in either article does it say she cut his penis off. Might want to change that title and that poll question.

 

[Erttheking]

"Vela later told police she became suspicious after smoking marijuana, and may have ingested other drugs before the attack..."

If anybody still thinks her actions were reasonable after reading this, then those people can leave now and not come back, please.

Yeah, it does sound like she wasn't in her right mind. If you're under the influence...well...I think a few years in prison would be the right course of action. Only a few because I'm fundamentally against extremely long prison sentences

Thing is, I am actually against the whole "TOUGH ON CRIME" mentality. That's not to say that crime should be taken lightly -it absolutely SHOULDN'T- but that slamming criminals with the largest, hardest sentences is rarely the best thing to do for everyone involved. It's all case by case, of course; I wouldn't compare treating a clumsy, one-time purse-snatcher moderately to taking it easy on a serial murderer/rapist/cannibal with nearly irrefutable evidence against him, but I think too often people focus ENTIRELY on the punishment aspects of prosecution and totally disregard the REFORMATIVE aspects of prosecution. One of the many names for a prison is a "Correctional Facility" for a reason.

True. I'm kind of like that too, so I guess this might be appropriate for a longer sentence. Not sure. The courts should probably see if she has a history of violence or if this was a one time thing that resulted from being under the influence.

That and there's the problem that the American prison system is more about punishment than rehabilitation.

 

[MeatMachine]

Nowhere in either article does it say she cut his penis off. Might want to change that title.

I've read several articles on this, and must've read the word "off" somewhere in my initial skimming. Whether I just imagined it or the first source I read was just wrong, I only included the 2 links I hadn't already closed out of.

Either way, you are correct - thank you for pointing that out, and I have edited it as necessary.

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

Nowhere in either article does it say she cut his penis off. Might want to change that title.

I've read several articles on this, and must've read the word "off" somewhere in my initial skimming. Whether I just imagined it or the first source I read was just wrong, I only included the 2 links I hadn't already closed out of.

Either way, you are correct - thank you for pointing that out, and I have edited it as necessary.

Cool, that does make a fairly significant difference to the seriousness of the crime, not massively up on US law but she'd probably have been looking at aggravated battery instead.

UK law she'd have been looking at aggravated GBH, 5-16 years, probably the higher end if she'd actually cut it off, otherwise more like 3-5.

It should be noted the victim was not seeking a prison term according to the article you posted.

 

[Mezahmay]

It should be noted the victim was not seeking a prison term according to the article you posted.

If I'm not mistaken that's somewhat irrelevant to felony cases in the United States since the victim is not actually a party represented in the same capacity as a civil case. It's always "Defendant name v. Name of state where crime occurred in felony cases since a law was broken and it isn't directly about monetary or equitable relief.

 

[Scarim Coral]

Justice for man as in the whole molesting or his penis being cut?

Either way, I went with injustice for both. How is it her punishment is less compared to that couple with a similar incident (granted the guy was cheating on her, not a pedo) that happened years ago?

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

It should be noted the victim was not seeking a prison term according to the article you posted.

If I'm not mistaken that's somewhat irrelevant to felony cases in the United States since the victim is not actually a party represented in the same capacity as a civil case. It's always "Defendant name v. Name of state where crime occurred in felony cases since a law was broken and it isn't directly about monetary or equitable relief.

Yeah, fair enough, since it didn't specify aggravated or felony battery I thought it might have been simple misdemeanour battery, but having looked up the confinement laws in Indiana they start at level 6 felony and go up to level 5 if a vehicle is involved and results in bodily harm, so I'd be surprised if it was simple battery.

 

[Shadowstar38]

I'm one of the weird people that's all for vigilante justice provided other avenues are exhausted. Stuff like an incompetent police force, bias court system, or corruption are a problem and his guilt is pretty clear? Fuck it, go after the guy.

But a suspicion and nothing else? No cops or therapists for the kid called to investigate? If you jump the gun like that and people are hurt, you deserve to do some time.

 

[MysticSlayer]

people are not only defending her actions, they are actually APPLAUDING her.

Honestly I see far more people complaining about the sexism of the criminal justice system[footnote]Which there is. If you view women as weak and in need of protection, try to guess how their sentences are going to compare to the men, who are viewed as strong and able to handle whatever you throw at them.[/footnote] than applauding the woman. But as for the (few) people that I saw who do view it as "justice" against the boy, they really need to reevaluate their standards of justice. Yes, if he had molested the child (which I'm guessing he didn't), then it would have been a horrible crime worthy of punishment (of course with all that rehabilitation stuff). However, causing physical harm to someone is far outside the scope of acceptable. Not to mention, I'm not particularly fond of taking the law into your own hands either. Overall, it is just way too easy to get overly emotional about these situations and not realize that we aren't really doing anyone a favor by mutilating someone because they did something wrong.

 

[stroopwafel]

Far more dangerous than some incidental 'vigilantism' I think is the automatic assumption that a man must be a child molester/rapist just b/c some child or woman said so. It's easy for someone with alterior motives to falsely accuse a man and have his life(or in this case genitals) ruined. Fact is that women can be conniving and malicious and children don't always speak the truth, but as a man the onus is always on you. And even if such a person is acquitted there is hardly any compensation or rectification. The justice system is a fucking joke.

I think society as a whole though needs to re-assess many of its base assumptions that are the source of so much institutional and legislative failings. But with media fanning the fire and being as politically correct as it is ofcourse that is unlikely to happen. And people in general are too dumb to think for themselves.

Ofcourse molesters should be punished but this must be according to due process not b/c the peasantry wants to burn anyone subject of even the vaguest accusations at the stake.