Sex Offender Let Off Because He is a 'Man of Faith'

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mpw, Aug 25, 2007.

  1. mpw Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    #1
    WTF?

    Saw this story on the news a couple of nights ago and it pissed me off. The guy is convicted of kiddie-fiddlin', including an 18month old and is spared jail because ,and this is from the BBC TV report I saw, the judge said he was a man of faith!? Nevermind that the guy used his position in the church to source his victims, as long as he believes in God he can't be bad, right? :rolleyes:

    Whatever jail time the guy should've got it pales considering the judge needs shooting.:mad:
     
  2. OnceUGoMac macrumors 6502a

    OnceUGoMac

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    #2
    Are these judges elected or appointed? I'm hoping the former.
     
  3. mpw thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    #3
    I believe they're appointed:(
     
  4. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #4
    This is unbelievable. One component of sentencing is to offer deterrence to others. I certainly do not see how this sentence would accomplish anything except the opposite.

    There is also the perception of the society to consider. If they believe justice will not be carried out fairly by the court, some of those victimized will resort to vigilance.

    I think the laws in GB are generally very good, better than America. This would seem to be an isolated event and not a true representation. Hopefully the prosecutor will find addition charges to file and a sane sentence rendered.
     
  5. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    What the hell? I thought our system was screwed up. Seems we're exporting it to you guys.
     
  6. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #6
    This is absolutely crazy. I hope the police will appeal.
     
  7. mpw thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    #7
    I'd hope so too, but I doubt it. Can they appeal when they got a conviction, even if it's a crappy sentence?

    I'd have less (not no) of an issue if it were just a short sentence or community service, but it's the justification of the lenient sentence that really pisses me off.
     
  8. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #8
    Oh yes, they can appeal against the sentence too, which is what they are considering.

    I agree the justification is sickening, but I believe he needs to be treated if anything more harshly than others, simply because he used his position to procure victims.
     
  9. mpw thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    #9
    Good. Wasn't sure about that.

    Yup, my position also. I didn't mean to imply I would've been 'happy' with the sentence if there'd been no religious nonsense mentioned.
     
  10. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #10
    You know, lots of Mafia guys think they're good Catholics, too. I suppose by the rationale in this case, we oughta just let them go on their business of murdering people.
     
  11. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #11
    Maybe we're missing something, but I fear we aren't and this is as it seems.
     
  12. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #12
    why religion are poisoning everything, this is why.
     
  13. Stampyhead macrumors 68020

    Stampyhead

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK
    #13
    B.S. How is religion to blame for the misdeeds of one person? There are sociopaths in all walks of life. Children have been abused by people in authority over them in other situations, school teachers and principals, camp counsellors, etc. Blaming religion for this man's crimes is just as repugnant as using his religion as an excuse to let him off.
     
  14. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #14
    Did you read the title of the thread? This man was given leniency for a disgusting set of crimes because of his belief system. His actions aren't down to his religion, but not only did it give him the opportunity to carry out those crimes, it also persuaded the judge to effectively let him get away with it.

    This abuse has to stop. If the Church (whatever denomination) cannot sort itself out, then it is up to the law to do so. Sadly this judge has proved incapable of using the powers granted to him.

    To quote the defendant's own sister:-

    Utterly revolting. The Jesus Defence must no longer be allowed.
     
  15. iBlue macrumors Core

    iBlue

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, England
    #15
    What a load of crap. Religion is real ****ing convenient sometimes. :rolleyes::mad:

    Even the Twinkie defense holds more value than this.
     
  16. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #16
    Which is all fine and dandy. But, you seem to have missed stampy's point. Letting the guy off because of his faith is "repugnant". But, blaming his faith for what he did is just as bad.

    If some guy committing the same crime was let off because he was white, you wouldn't blame whites for the crime, but you would be repulsed by the reasoning for which he was released. The judge in that case would be relieved of his position and replaced by someone who can read the law as it stands. Even complaining that white judges would be biased is unfair the vast, overwhelming, majority of white people that would judge a trial fairly.

    More important than whatever strange motive the judge had to let this guy off, is that he let this guy off. I have no problem with invoking the Jesus defense, the Man-kept-me-down defense, or the Chewbacca defense. What is important is how the system responds to the defense. Religion is one thing. An judge that has no business playing judge is another.
     
  17. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    If this goes through I'm sure Islamic terrorists will use this "man of faith" line in the future to get lighter sentencing.
     
  18. KristieMac macrumors 6502a

    KristieMac

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Location:
    Harrisburg, PA
    #18
    Sickening. I'm going to have to add this to my list of reasons that the human race should die out.

    It's bad enough when the criminals act like criminals. Now we have to worry about the judges, too.
     
  19. jsw Moderator emeritus

    jsw

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Location:
    Andover, MA
    #19
    Well, if he's free to walk the streets, it makes it easier for others to track him down and do as they will with him. Not that I'd advocate vigilante justice or anything. Except, for example, against convicted and admitted serial child molesters.
     
  20. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #20
    Maybe we're interpreting clevin's original point differently. The poison of religion here isn't in the man's actions, but that the judge considered that despite those actions the defendant was still moral enough to be allowed a lower punishment. The poison is the implied higher morality by association with religion, the complete opposite of reality for this individual.

    That's how I read clevin's comment anyway. Nobody was blaming the faith, just the judge's bias towards it.
     
  21. Stampyhead macrumors 68020

    Stampyhead

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK
    #21
    And I may have misunderstood what Clevin was saying, but even so - the fact that the man walked free is the fault of the judge, religion is just an innocent bystander. It's kind of like the judge saying, "I'm going to let this man go free because he is a friend of dynamicv's, and dynamicv is a fine, upstanding citizen." and then the public says, "let's blame dynamicv for this man being able to walk free!"

    Ha ha, one of my all time favorite defenses...
     
  22. Mac-Addict macrumors 65816

    Mac-Addict

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #22
    So when AT&T sue everyone for unlocking their iPhones (Even if it is legal) we can just say we are men/women of iFaith and get off?
    Jokes aside this sickens me, I think we are becoming worse than America.
     
  23. miniConvert macrumors 68040

    miniConvert

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Location:
    Kent, UK - the 'Garden of England'.
    #23
    I think they should have left the sentencing to the guys sister, she seems to be right on the money.
     
  24. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #24
    Where this falls down is that this man would never be in the position to abuse children in the first place thanks to knowing me, nor would I ever be in a position to influence the judge with fear of after-death reprisals.

    But I see your point :p

    Agreed.
     
  25. Daveman Deluxe macrumors 68000

    Daveman Deluxe

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Location:
    Corvallis, Oregon
    #25
    There are any number of organizations which put adults in a position to abuse children. Sports, education, and professional nannying come to mind. Just plain KNOWING a child theoretically puts an adult in such a position. There may be some incompetence/ill intent in letting this particular man be around children (cf. bishops shuffling priests around between parishes rather than sacking them), but again, that's the fault of the people in charge, not religion in general.
     

Share This Page