Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

American vs Canadian Justice: Two recent cases of child abuse

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 07:38 AM
link   
wth, Canada has more strict illegal issue, esp, sex related than America does... for example, Animated cartoon porn with children or children cartoon is illegal, etc, bestiality is illegal, there is much more..

The case you are representing is like saying OJ's case = America's justice system.




posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by rtyfx
 


Why do you keep giving excuses for their abusive behavior? They have 100% control over themselves at the end of the day. They make a conscious decision to inflict pain on defenseless humans.

The whole point of this thread was stating that Canada should have longer jail sentences for people that abuse children. Why do you keep going on about the death penalty?
edit on 10-10-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:10 AM
link   
reply to post by TinkerHaus
 



I was also treated very badly by my step-dad - more than a few hospital visits because of him. Once he broke my cheek bone and I missed school for a month to avoid questioning. He was sick and twisted in his punishments too, not in a sexual way but in a physically abusive and emotionally/psychologically humiliating way. I am glad to say that he has seen the errors in his ways as he grew older and wiser. I hated him with my entire being when I was young, and now I'm wise enough to realize that he was young and didn't know how to handle himself in stressful situations.


Anyone over the age of 14 has the ability to understand that they shouldn't beat children and that it is wrong. Making excuses for these people is sick...Apologetic mindsets like yours is what gets these people 2 years in prison.


They should also not be allowed to be around children unsupervised until a therapist in conjunction with a court deems them fit to do so.


They should never be able to be around children again. If they found it alright to beat children once, there is a high probability they'll find it alright to do so again.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by rtyfx
 


Socialism is actually all about democracy, more-so than capitalism is at least.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
I would not go singing the praises of the US justice system. There are many cases of child rape and child abuse where the sentence is very light for much the same reasons as listed in the Canadian case used in the OP.

This is especially true with sex offenders, here in the US there are many cases where these people get released to offend again and again and again.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


to cite your source - the canadian was SENTENCED to 18 months - what sentence did the prosecution want / what is the max permitted ? , in the american case the prosecution is REQUESTING a 45 year sentence - lets see what the court awards



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


What is amazing to me is that in the Canadian case once the police arrived the mother of the child proceeded to show the officers the other numerous bruises and bite marks on the child. It made me wonder how long the abuse had been going on, and why on Earth the mother of the child had allowed it to continue. It is my opinion that the mother is just as guilty as the abuser for not putting a stop to it IMMEDIATELY!!!

If the mother herself was being abused and did nothing about it that's her own fault; she is an adult and makes her own decisions. But once the man started abusing the child it was her duty as a parent to insure the child's safety. A child cannot protect herself- it is the parent's job to do that for her.

The 18 month sentence is far too lenient. The man should have to sit in prison for a number of years, and the mother should also be in prison for several years for allowing the abuse to happen. He couldn't have hurt the child that bad if the mother had taken the child and ran or called the police herself. If the neighbor hadn't called the police the child might not even be alive today.

For those who think the 45 year sentence in Texas is too much, she won't serve 45 years. I grew up with a guy who was convicted on Murder in the First Degree who was sentenced to 25 years to life- he only served 7 years. If the woman serves more than 10-15 years I would be surprised.

I have my own opinions about punishment in cases of severe child abuse. I think they ought to pass a special law that once convicted the abuser gets locked in a room with the abused child's family members for one hour- with no protection and no way to escape. If the abuser is still breathing after that hour they take him/her to serve the rest of their sentence. If the bleeding hearts that pity the abuser don't like it- oh well! Being abused yourself is no excuse for abusing children no matter what!

If anyone ever hurt my 2 year old grandgirl like that the police wouldn't be called until AFTER a family "meeting"!



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


Being from the U.S.A all I can say is that I think they should be locked up for 45 years. Why? Because when the *(^&^ comes out of prison she won't be of child bearing age anymore,so she won't have another one to torture. End of problem on that note.

I would like to believe that when his fellow inmates find out his crimes, he will be appropriately dealt with. Even amongst prisoners child abusers are hated Yeah, I'm afraid that as nice as it may seem to think that... the truth is that most prisons separate the child abusers from the general population due to the fact they are so hated.I would like to see them thrown into the general population myself and let the other inmates have at them.If they don't survive,oh well, no great loss there.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Dimithae
 

Child abusers are in GP unless there is a need for PC. Separation by the administration is a common misconception.

Inmates themselves do tend to segregate somewhat based on crimes and race except among the seriously mentally ill where they really don't care what other inmates did as long as they treat each other decently.
edit on 10/10/2012 by rtyfx because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   
I guess it involves past criminal record, and the judge themselves; however, Canada has been known for being extremely light on criminals :-/



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


Agreed; 18 months compared to a potential 45 year sentence is quite a discrepancy. But, could we look at it from a different angle where the TRUE punishment for the Edmonton man begins after the 18 month sentence is served.

His life with his family (however messed up it was) is gone forever.

He'll never find adequet employment. (Canadian employers have every right to run criminal background checks on potential employees. And they use that right to the fullest.) Tough to make it without a job...

He'll be now a registered child abuser in whatever town or city he decides to live. This will hang over his head for the rest of his life.

The list of "walls" goes on and on....

My point is; the 18 month sentence is only the beginning. This belief that "he's got it coming in prison...Those other inmates will take good care of him..." is just silly.

One inmate judging another inmate for their crimes is like the proverbial pot calling the kettle black...it means absolutely nothing.

The American looking at 45 years for a similar crime is basically sheltered from negative social reactions and true consequence of his brutal behavior. Because, it's people like YOU and ME who can really make his life tough.

In prison, he'll be protected...out here, he won't.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   
18 months is a little light but i think my IQ is a little high to jump on the "lets torture and kill them" band wagon.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


to cite your source - the canadian was SENTENCED to 18 months - what sentence did the prosecution want / what is the max permitted ? , in the american case the prosecution is REQUESTING a 45 year sentence - lets see what the court awards


Due to the publication ban, finding out the specific charge and sentencing request may be difficult.

That being said, we do know that the prosecution asked for a hasher sentence, but was denied.

From the OP's source:

Philp noted that deterrence and denunciation are paramount factors in cases where children are subjected to violence, but rejected a Crown call for a harsher sentence because of the abuser’s Aboriginal background.


Edit to add:

We can't answer what the maximum penalty would be without knowing the specific charge(s) brought on.
edit on 10-10-2012 by peck420 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


A persons punishment should be what a legal court decides it to be. No more and no less. Unfortunately 18 months is extremely short and seems too unfair to the victim and the family.. however, the punishment isn't 18 months of sexual assault. We cannot condone this behavior. When the people who rape child molesters in prison aren't raping child molesters, they are raping first time young naive non-violent offenders. Usually some white kid from the suburbs you got caught with drugs or something.

Let's not condone any prison rape at all. To prison rapists it makes no difference who they are raping. It's just one more validation of their sick behavior.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I can understand your disgust, but you're not really looking at the larger picture of the US vs Canada penal systems.

In the US we have private prisons that are for-profit corporations. To these companies, it is in their best interest to have people sentenced for long periods, but also to not focus on helping people with mental illness to avoid being a repeat offender. Even our government assisted health care programs, are pretty terrible at this, with only a 10% - 20% success rate at treating individuals with mood disorders.

Canada has a bit of a better rate at helping these people overcome their issues and return to society as healthy individuals.

Feeling disugust at the actions of these people is a natural response, and doubly when you consider the damage this is going to instil into these children's and how their brain develops. However, we can help both the offender, and victim through the right treatment plans, and I feel that it is a positive step for a society to take, to help someone become a healty member of society - then pay $50,000/yr to keep them locked up. It's also cheaper.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Drezden
 


Where did I at any point support "prisoner rape"...??

It was you who infered your own conclusions based on your preconceptions of the matter. You may want to crticize yourself, before you do the same to me.


Wow people need to control their assumptions a bit better.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by rtyfx
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 

I'm not trolling and you damn well know it.

Two years is light.

What I read in this thread is no better than the child abusers themselves. There are some sick people here.
edit on 10/9/2012 by rtyfx because: (no reason given)


I disagree. I think it a natural response to some of the horrific things that evil people do to children. For a normal person, such actions really do create a visceral response that is angry, disgusted, and horrified at the same time. To feel such as way is actually very human.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Evil_Santa
I can understand your disgust, but you're not really looking at the larger picture of the US vs Canada penal systems.

In the US we have private prisons that are for-profit corporations. To these companies, it is in their best interest to have people sentenced for long periods, but also to not focus on helping people with mental illness to avoid being a repeat offender. Even our government assisted health care programs, are pretty terrible at this, with only a 10% - 20% success rate at treating individuals with mood disorders.

Canada has a bit of a better rate at helping these people overcome their issues and return to society as healthy individuals.

Feeling disugust at the actions of these people is a natural response, and doubly when you consider the damage this is going to instil into these children's and how their brain develops. However, we can help both the offender, and victim through the right treatment plans, and I feel that it is a positive step for a society to take, to help someone become a healty member of society - then pay $50,000/yr to keep them locked up. It's also cheaper.


For some criminals yes, but someone who has the penchant for doing such horrible things to children, no amount of rehabilitation helps and they are VERY likely to re-offend. For them, we should either execute them or have life in prison. As for expense, if we stopped the WOD and did not pack our prisons with non-violent drug offenders, we could afford to keep the real monsters behind bars forever.
edit on 10-10-2012 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
So what's appropriate?

What's the goal?

Is it supposed to keep the actor from reoffending? Make the victim feel better? Cure the actor of whatever drove him to commit the crime? Make society feel better? Earn brownie points for some DA?

Really, what's the stated goal and is this goal being accomplished?

The whole penal concept baffles me. Seems like a lot of hot heads wasting a lot of time and resources and accomplishing nothing but they're all so damn sure they just have to do something.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal
I would not go singing the praises of the US justice system. There are many cases of child rape and child abuse where the sentence is very light for much the same reasons as listed in the Canadian case used in the OP.

This is especially true with sex offenders, here in the US there are many cases where these people get released to offend again and again and again.


Well said, and it is very sad.





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join