Schoolgirl rapist shot in attack

[edesignuk]

The man shot in both legs in a paramilitary-style attack in Londonderry was awaiting sentencing for raping a 15-year-old schoolgirl.

Keith Burnside, 37, from Rosemount Gardens was convicted in March of raping a girl in his car at Sandbank Cottages in 2000.

Two masked men entered his home in Rosemount Gardens at about 2315 BST on Monday and fired a number of shots.

He suffered injuries to both legs, and was taken to hospital for treatment. BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/7973598.stm).

Not quite sure how to feel about that. You can't just go round shooting people in the legs, but then you shouldn't have been raping 15 year olds.

[iBlue]

You know, if vigilante justice and violent attacks are going to happen (as they do), I have to say, I mind a lot less when it happens to scumbags like that. So consider my pity all dried up for this one.

[arkitect]

was awaiting sentencing

While that kind of vigilante/para-military style "justice" has its visceral appeal — especially if executioner is Clint Eastwood — in life outside the cinema it is the end of rule of law.

If this had happened after sentencing — and he had walked scott free… different.

Couldn't they have waited?

[trule]

If this had happened after sentencing — and he had walked scott free… different.

Couldn't they have waited?

Different, how? Wait for what?

[steveza]

While that kind of vigilante/para-military style "justice" has its visceral appeal — especially if executioner is Clint Eastwood — in life outside the cinema it is the end of rule of law.

If this had happened after sentencing — and he had walked scott free… different.

Couldn't they have waited?If he was awaiting sentencing then he must have already been found guilty.

I'm not really on the side of taking the law into your own hands but it would be interesting to see how/if the gunmen were connected to the rape victim.

[arkitect]

Different, how? Wait for what?
*sigh*
I'll explain.

Couldn't they (vigilantes) have waited to satisfy their unlawful self-righteousness until after a (according to their standards) light sentence had been passed. Why jump the gun?
It would have been different because then everybody could cluck and tut about how the "Law" doesn't work and if the community didn't look after their own etcetera…
Capice?

And, no, I am not condoning vigilante behaviour, so don't get on any high-horse.
Thanks.
:)

If he was awaiting sentencing then he must have already been found guilty.
And that is my point. He had already been found guilty and was awaiting his sentence.
No need for "the community" to step in an dish out unlawful punishment.
Ever.

[iBlue]

FTR I knew what you meant, arkitect.

They could have waited the 3 months he'd likely get in prison before shooting holes in him.

[steveza]

They could have waited the 3 months he'd likely get in prison before shooting holes in him.Exactly ;). When caught they will probably get a longer stretch.

[william sire]

Was the shooter aiming at his penis and missed twice?

[iJohnHenry]

I'm not really on the side of taking the law into your own hands but it would be interesting to see how/if the gunmen were connected to the rape victim.

How about if he was Catholic and she/they were Protestant.

This is Londonderry, remember??

[apsterling]

Why jump the gun?

Because if they didn't we wouldn't unintentionally have these kinds of puns!

[Lord Blackadder]

It's a bad business, not that I'm terribly sorry for the rapist, but mob/vigilante violence is uncontrolled and can have all sorts of side-effects.

[waiwai]

well i think instead of shooting the dude's legs they shoulda:

1. strapped his legs with phone books
2. baseball bat his legs to a pulp...

there wouldn't be many marks left on his legs...

[allmIne]

Exactly ;). When caught they will probably get a longer stretch.

The shooters won't get caught.

[velocityg4]

The shooters won't get caught.
What!! I am sure the police have their best janitor working the case. In between cleaning toilets.

[Peace]

There are courts for a reason. Vigilante justice is never right. Never.

[waiwai]

There are courts for a reason. Vigilante justice is never right. Never.

The justice system is flawed, there are countless cases where criminals have gone free with a slap on the wrist. What we need is a friggin' Judge Dredd.

Maybe I'm going off on a tangent here, but a lot of things happening these days... Could almost definately be prevented or at least deter these horrendous acts from happening, if we had an "eye for an eye" justice system. So since that guy raped the little girl, we would send the rapist to a special prison where bubba can make him into a woman. I'm pretty sure, there will be less and less crime if this was the case.

My thoughts go out to the little girl. What happened to her was atrocious, unforgiveable and I don't feel any sympathy for the rapist that got his legs pumped full of lead.

[nick9191]

Keith Burnside, 37, was shot in his Rosemount Gardens home by two masked men in front of his girlfriend

Who the hell dates a child rapist?

[iJohnHenry]

A freaky girl, who dates bad-boys.

The same ones that marry death-row prisoners.

[Peace]

The justice system is flawed, there are countless cases where criminals have gone free with a slap on the wrist. What we need is a friggin' Judge Dredd.

Maybe I'm going off on a tangent here, but a lot of things happening these days... Could almost definately be prevented or at least deter these horrendous acts from happening, if we had an "eye for an eye" justice system. So since that guy raped the little girl, we would send the rapist to a special prison where bubba can make him into a woman. I'm pretty sure, there will be less and less crime if this was the case.

My thoughts go out to the little girl. What happened to her was atrocious, unforgiveable and I don't feel any sympathy for the rapist that got his legs pumped full of lead.

Hatred is not a family value. Who's worse ? A rapist or a murderer ?

It's all bad. Raping is bad. Attempted murder is bad. Harming another human being is bad. The old adage of an eye for an eye is wrong. It leads to people stringing up people of a different color because one group thinks they are bad. Or dragging gays behind pick up trucks.

It leads to vigilante groups patrolling borders and shooting people.

What's next ? If my group of humans think your group is bad do we have a right to go to your house and shoot you? NO.

[waiwai]

Hatred is not a family value. Who's worse ? A rapist or a murderer ?

It's all bad. Raping is bad. Attempted murder is bad. Harming another human being is bad. The old adage of an eye for an eye is wrong. It leads to people stringing up people of a different color because one group thinks they are bad. Or dragging gays behind pick up trucks.

It leads to vigilante groups patrolling borders and shooting people.

What's next ? If my group of humans think your group is bad do we have a right to go to your house and shoot you? NO.

"Who's worse ? A rapist or a murderer ?"
Both are bad. But its only fair if you murder or rape someone... that you get murdered or raped in return. My gut says if this were the case, we'd have a lot less crime, as the scumbags would think twice about committing any sort of crime... Heck, it would also be cheaper for taxpayers so we wouldn't have to house these creeps for extended periods of time, in lavish residents we call prisons in North America.

"It leads to people stringing up people of a different color because one group thinks they are bad. Or dragging gays behind pick up trucks."
No one said anything about harming others because they are different. It is not a crime to be different... color or sexual orientation. I'm talking strictly about the justice system and serious crimes. Does the justice system prosecute people because they are of different color or sexual orientation? NO, so you talking about stringing up and dragging people behind pick up trucks, who are "different" won't ever happen even if my suggestion to revamp the justice system were to be adpoted.

"It leads to vigilante groups patrolling borders and shooting people."
And this is bad? If you can't cross the border legally, that means you shouldn't be entering the country. All that happens now a days is people get deported back to their country of origin, and there is nothing to stop them from re-entering illegally again (and yes there is almost always a way to get back in... if they got in fine without a problem the first time... you can bet your lifesavings that they'll find another way in). Until you start laying the smack down on people from illegally immigrating into a country, they will always keep coming and that affects the local economy and ultimately the community as a whole. IF these people were truly in dire need of assistance (like escaping from religious prosecution or war), they can apply for refugee status or under some other humanitarian status.

"What's next ? If my group of humans think your group is bad do we have a right to go to your house and shoot you? NO"
You answered your own question.

[iJohnHenry]

You're talking to a wall. He's using the "gateway" opening gambit, ignoring all the time that it is not logical at all.

But no one has mentioned the poor lawyers and their families, should the current system be crushed by popular demand. How will they feed their children?? :(

[theBB]

What kind of fantasy world do you live in? Do you think people commit rapes or murders because they think "Hey, it is only 20 years in jail". No, they either don't think at all or they believe they will not get caught. Once the sentence for a crime reaches a few decades, a harsher sentence cannot deter anybody more.

[bruinsrme]

In this case if the police commissioner made a statement that he/she has their men and women diligently working on this case to find the vigilantes, well who am I to question their integrity.
now the rapist has something that will haunt him for the rest of his life, just like his victim.

[Peace]

You're talking to a wall. He's using the "gateway" opening gambit, ignoring all the time that it is not logical at all.

But no one has mentioned the poor lawyers and their families, should the current system be crushed by popular demand. How will they feed their children?? :(


I'm not a "wall". I just don't happen to believe in vigilante justice. It's up to organized courts to decide punishment. Not your everyday arm chair judge.
And no individual has any right , morally or legally to carry out their own view of justice. Doing so makes that person just as much a "monster" as the perpetrator.

Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.

[zap2]

"Who's worse ? A rapist or a murderer ?"
Both are bad. But its only fair if you murder or rape someone... that you get murdered or raped in return.

Is that so? So we're going to make thats true for all crimes right? Steal something and you'll get something stolen from you.

Our justice system shouldn't be based around vengeance

My gut says if this were the case, we'd have a lot less crime, as the scumbags would think twice about committing any sort of crime...
If your gut says it, who is to argue!
But seriously, people don't think about the penalties when they commit a crime. What we should be doing is increase education to fight poverty and crime, which would lead lower rapes and murders. You want to deal with the symptoms, when really we need to be fighting the cause.

Heck, it would also be cheaper for taxpayers so we wouldn't have to house these creeps for extended periods of time, in lavish residents we call prisons in North America. .

No it wouldn't, with the current appeals process, its cheaper to house someone in prison!
And no one buys the argument of lavish prison , so don't bother trying to mislead people

[.Andy]

But its only fair if you murder or rape someone... that you get murdered or raped in return.
Wouldn't we quickly run out of people who aren't murderers in this proposed scenario? Who murders the last murderer? Hardly fair that they get off scott free :confused:.

[iJohnHenry]

I'm not a "wall". I just don't happen to believe in vigilante justice. It's up to organized courts to decide punishment. Not your everyday arm chair judge.

If the courts fail to perform their duty, as demanded by the majority, what then???

And no individual has any right , morally or legally to carry out their own view of justice. Doing so makes that person just as much a "monster" as the perpetrator.

If there is any doubt as the the perpetrator's guilt, I would agree with you. But, as indicated above, if the "system" has less concern for the victim then the accused, what's the point???

Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.

An old saw, to be sure. But Biblical pronouncements aside, who will speak for the victim??

[Peace]

If the courts fail to perform their duty, as demanded by the majority, what then???

The courts are bound by Law. If "the majority" thinks the court isn't doing this then they should follow the law to try and change it.



If there is any doubt as the the perpetrator's guilt, I would agree with you. But, as indicated above, if the "system" has less concern for the victim then the accused, what's the point???

That's a very subjective question. How do you know "the system" has less concern ? Do you read minds ?



An old saw, to be sure. But Biblical pronouncements aside, who will speak for the victim??

Victims advocates, the family. Other lawyers. Lawful Protests. As long as it's done within the law.

[Rt&Dzine]

If a drunk driver injured a teenage girl, is it okay for one of her friends to shoot the driver as punishment?

[iJohnHenry]

If a drunk driver injured a teenage girl, is it okay for one of her friends to shoot the driver as punishment?

In the U.S., yep, but not to kill, just to maim to the same level as the poor victim.

[waiwai]

What kind of fantasy world do you live in? Do you think people commit rapes or murders because they think "Hey, it is only 20 years in jail". No, they either don't think at all or they believe they will not get caught. Once the sentence for a crime reaches a few decades, a harsher sentence cannot deter anybody more.

Yes, I do. If you make it known that bubba is gonna rape you if you rape someone they're gonna think real hard before committing rape. If you make the punishment severe enough people WILL think of the consequences before committing a crime.

zap2:
We're focusing strictly on rape and murder. If you make harsher punishment like rape for rape / murder for murder, then I'm betting my money that there will be less of these crimes committed. Forget stealing and lesser crimes. I'm talking the more serious ones.

I can tell you that it will work with regards to lowering the rate of these serious crimes occurring.

Sorry but the prisons in North America both in Canada and the US are like spas compared to those in countries such as China and Russia. This is fact and it is not misleading at all. Rec rooms? TV? Gym? DAMN! They are non-existent in other countries... Heck! In those countries you're confined to a box with no running water / toilet or anything for most of your sentence, and lets not mention that you'll be sharing your living quarters with master splinter and his family. you get a concrete bench to sit and lay on. if you're lucky, you might actually get a mattress to sleep on.

Sometimes democracy goes too far to protect everyone including criminals, which is why crime rates are much higher in democratic countries compared to communist ones.

[bruinsrme]

If a drunk driver injured a teenage girl, is it okay for one of her friends to shoot the driver as punishment?

I bet that driver would thnk twice about drinking and driving again

[zap2]

zap2:
We're focusing strictly on rape and murder. If you make harsher punishment like rape for rape / murder for murder, then I'm betting my money that there will be less of these crimes committed.

Unless you have some facts or numbers to pack that up...it really doesn't matter

I have some number that go against you're gut

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates


Murder Rates in states w/ death penalty

2005-5.87
2006-5.9
2007-5.83

Murder Rates in states w/o death penalty

2005-4.03
2006-4.22
2007-4.10

The numbers go back until early 90s from that one link, but the states without always have a lower rate


I can tell you that it will work with regards to lowering the rate of these serious crimes occurring.

You could, but without an firm numbers, I wouldn't believe you


Sorry but the prisons in North America both in Canada and the US are like spas compared to those in countries such as China and Russia.
Yes, our standards should be Russian and Chinese based. :rolleyes:

This is fact and it is not misleading at all.

No it is, you called them lavish, they are not. You didn't compare them, you stated they were "lavish"


! They are non-existent in other countries... Heck! In those countries you're confined to a box with no running water / toilet or anything for most of your sentence, and lets not mention that you'll be sharing your living quarters with master splinter and his family. you get a concrete bench to sit and lay on. if you're lucky, you might actually get a mattress to sleep on.

How are those prison system working out? I wouldn't go basing our prison system off those, I'd look for prison system from nations such as norway, if I was to look externally for prison ideas.

http://www.straffet.com/eng/index.htm

The whole system of open prison is aimed at the possibility of rehabilitation, of returning to normal life. And here you instinctively believe that it truly is rehabilitation, and not punishment.

Norway has learned to value its citizens, even those who break the law. Some 30% of all prisoners in Norway, that is to say about a thousand people, are in open prisons. They are those with only one year to eighteen months left to serve, or those who started with a very short sentence. They need the maximum adjustment to normal life before leaving prison, the authorities believe, and this is not at all easy after a long term. That is why these open prisons have such a free regime. It is in society's interest to get back a full-fledged citizen.

That is a system we could be proud of and would help our world(or something along those lines). Not to mention a low murder rate! (see my next link, norway is 54/62...62 being the lowest)


Sometimes democracy goes too far to protect everyone including criminals, which is why crime rates are much higher in democratic countries compared to communist ones.

First can I get some numbers to back that claim up.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita


Looking there, I can't see a trend to back up your claim. Admittedly the "communist" doesn't give me much info, but I'll assume you mean nations with respect for civil rights(democracy) vs little respect for them(communist)

I see nations of all types, all over the list.

[Peace]

Capitol punishment in Canada has been abolished since 1976 yet the murder rate is higher in the USA than in Canada.

I'd say capitol punishment has no bearing on curtailing murders.

[Rt&Dzine]

I bet that driver would thnk twice about drinking and driving again

Oops ... they shot the wrong kid by mistake.

[2jaded2care]

I'm probably not the one to argue against vigilante justice, but -- these masked gunmen burst into a home at night and shoot a man in front of a six-year-old child, possibly because that man has been found guilty of raping a 15-year-old girl? Sure, the girl was likely traumatized... What about that six-year-old kid?

Brilliant.

And I understand the man was apparently convicted of the crime, but the article raises many questions it doesn't answer. The girl was raped in 2000, didn't report it and blotted it from her mind for seven years, then remembered the event when the man smirked at her? Was there corroborating physical evidence after seven years? Did he confess? Criminal history of prior assaults? Hopefully, otherwise I'd be skeptical of the "repressed memory" thing. But the article doesn't answer those questions.

Very frustrating.

[phillipjfry]

well i think instead of shooting the dude's legs they shoulda:

1. strapped his legs with phone books
2. baseball bat his legs to a pulp...

there wouldn't be many marks left on his legs...

wtf? does that work?? :confused:

[zap2]

Capitol punishment in Canada has been abolished since 1976 yet the murder rate is higher in the USA than in Canada.

I'd say capitol punishment has no bearing on curtailing murders.

Interesting, when we give hard numbers to disprove the claim that others made "with their gut"(that the death penalty curves rape/murder rates), no one responds!

[Desertrat]

About all the death penalty does is cost the taxpayer a bunch of lawyer money for fifteen years of appeals, plus the $30,000/yr while he's in the process. Otherwise, however, it does affect the recidivism rate. :)

There doesn't seem to be a lot of correlation between the length of time of sentences (after some ten years or more) and crime rates. Certainty of capture and punishment has a bearing, and then the speedy trial/incarceration deal contributes.

A lot of major crimes are not at all planned. A cop buddy of mine once commented, "These guys we haul in here aren't BAD. They're just eat up with the terminal dumbass."

'Rat

[skunk]

There are courts for a reason. Vigilante justice is never right. Never.Absolutely right.

[WinterMute]

Tempting as it is to step outside the rule of law and give some scum-bag a righteous kicking in retaliation for his crime, such action carries the penalty of law itself, and the danger of getting the wrong scum-bag for the wrong crime.

Capital punishment doesn't work because the judicial process is flawed and you end up killing the wrong man, heinous though it is, a wrongly convicted murdered can be released from prison, he cannot be released from the grave. Similarly vigilante justice doesn't work because the mob mentality is just that, mental, witness the crowd in the North of England who attacked the home of a paediatrician, mistaking him for a pedophile.

Flawed as it is the Judicial system in the west does return the correct verdict on occasion and our policy of incarceration, again though flawed, is one that guarantees the safety of the majority in most cases. Taking the law into your own hands risks overturning the foundation of our society, the belief that the bad man will be brought to book, of course this only happens for the dumb, poor and stupid bad man, not the rich and clever bad man.

I wonder if you'd get the same response if it was reported that Joe Cassano, the ex-chief of AIG Financial Products, had been shot by a vigilante group of broke investors?