reply to post by JohnPhoenix
I’ll try to answer your questions as I appreciate your asking without judging.
Do you guys think abuse then or proof of abuse should be used to keep someone from even being on trial for murder? How do you determine this
and how does this negate pre-meditated murder?
Do I believe proof of abuse should keep someone from even being on trial for murder?
Yes, and no.
- If a victim of childhood sexual abuse - at any point during an attack fights back and kills their abuser there should be a trial to comply with the
law and the trial should end in exoneration.
- If a victim of childhood sexual abuse kills their abuser without the provocation of an attack? This gets a little more complicated but again in
most cases (if not all) my ‘vote’ would be for an acquittal.
Arguably, there’s no crime that produces more long lasting and devastating effects on a human than childhood rape/abuse. There’s no way to regain
normalcy again. Ever. I’ll not go into the short and long term repercussions of childhood rape but if I was asked ‘What is a punishment that
fits the crime?’ - My answer would be - death. Simple. (Again, with undisputed proof of said abuse).
You seen to indicate that If True, the act of having been abused relinquishes this person from any responsibility of his murderous actions, and
that they should all simply go free with no sentence for his/her crime. How do you determine that said person has been abused to the extent to absolve
them of their crimes?
- Does it relinquish them of responsibility? No. But they should not be victimized again for ‘ending’ their abuse.
- How do we determine? We can’t. Only the victim can determine that. The ‘gray areas’ of childhood abuse is vast and foggy. For one child
being touched inappropriately can and does cause lifelong damage, devastation. For another? Another may simply grimace at the unpleasant memory of
their dirty old Uncle Perve.
Then there’s rape and torture, etc.
My point? No one has the right to ‘judge’ the effects of this particular crime other than the person who has to live with them - for the rest of
their life I might add. That’s something no one should ever forget. Being a victim of Childhood Sexual Abuse is a life sentence. And that’s an
awful long time. And for what? For being nothing but a child. For being nothing but innocent. Think about that a minute.
How do you apply this even in the case of premeditated murder?
As distasteful as this will be let me draw a picture.
The abuser will offer to watch over the victim - knowing the second he/she is left alone with the victim rape will commence. That’s premeditated.
The abuser often will act on the spur of the moment, but in the majority of cases there is premeditation of the crime.
The victim? The victim is a CHILD. How does a CHILD fight a premeditated rape? How does a CHILD fight at all? So, in the turn of the tables as the
child matures the child hides a knife under his/her pillow and one of those nights the abuser gets stuck like the pig that he/she is. That is also
premeditated. But it’s JUST!
The point I’m struggling to make is this. The victim in this case is a CHILD. Premeditation after the fact? To finally commit the act of
‘defending’ oneself, even later? Oh well. Sucks to be the abuser doesn’t it. Too bad, they’re dead.
I can only hope the ‘civilized’ world comes to terms with Adult Survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse with an open mind (equaling true justice) and
the sooner the better. Especially before another child/adult victim is unjustly victimized by the system that failed to protect them in the first
What exactly about the abuse makes the person non guilty of murder?
Oh, they’re still guilty of murder, but in my way of thinking? It’s called ‘justifiable homicide’ premeditated or not. Justifiable all the
edit on 17-9-2012 by silo13 because: structure