Support NeoGAF

[whytemyke]

What, a life where I believe that everyone deserves due process in a court of law? Man, I must be some kind of spoiled brat. The 21st century's all about Trailer Park Justice, I guess.

Why shouldn't it be about "Trailer Park Justice"? Look at what justice is doing for Scott Peterson. He BARELY got convicted, and it will probably be overturned, and he'll walk even though he murdered his wife and unborn child. or Kobe Bryant, or even OJ.

The thing with Trailer Park Justice is that it's quick, effective and cheap. You see pictures on a families computer of their child being raped by the parents, you drag the parents into the streets, shoot them, and it's over. Net cost- price of bullet.

PS: I live up here near Detroit, so I see more than enough of this kind of crap, and there's something sad about a society where the prisons are dealing punishment better than the government. Some asshole got pulled over for a parking ticket last spring. Cops took his license, went back to the car, and started writing him up a speeding ticket. He got out of his car, pulled his gun and let loose a clip into the car.... 4 in the 23 year old guy driving the car, and 7 into the female 24 year old cop on the passenger side. That bastard that did this will go to jail and be lauded as a hero as he lives out his life behind bars. Tell me how THAT is somehow better than Trailer Park justice, and I'll rest my case. Mind you, this was all on video, as well.

 

[ShadowRed]

"The woman's attorney, John Bjorlie, said D'Andrea admitted to police that she committed the crimes because she was afraid of Jordan.

"She's a victim in the sense that she's in fear of her boyfriend," he told WHDH-TV. "There was a fear of him that led her to do some of these things."

She's worse than he is. That's her daughter. She put her daughter through that, and now she wants sympathy because she was afraid? Boo hoo. Perhaps she should have given a women's shelter a shot before resorting to letting her child be abused. You know, if I believed her story. Which I don't. No mother who cared about her child would do that, so I say she is a sicko who did it willingly.

IFAWTP!!! If she was so afraid of him then she should have hit the fucking road a long time ago. Also at some point as a parent you have to stand up for your child regardless of the waht may happen. If a guy puts a gun to your head and says, "Let me rape your daughter while you take picture or I'll kill you." then you just have to eat that bullet. Fuck this I was afraid for my life BS, what about your kids.

 

[Aurum]

Why shouldn't it be about "Trailer Park Justice"? Look at what justice is doing for Scott Peterson. He BARELY got convicted, and it will probably be overturned, and he'll walk even though he murdered his wife and unborn child. or Kobe Bryant, or even OJ.

The thing with Trailer Park Justice is that it's quick, effective and cheap. You see pictures on a families computer of their child being raped by the parents, you drag the parents into the streets, shoot them, and it's over. Net cost- price of bullet.

PS: I live up here near Detroit, so I see more than enough of this kind of crap, and there's something sad about a society where the prisons are dealing punishment better than the government. Some asshole got pulled over for a parking ticket last spring. Cops took his license, went back to the car, and started writing him up a speeding ticket. He got out of his car, pulled his gun and let loose a clip into the car.... 4 in the 23 year old guy driving the car, and 7 into the female 24 year old cop on the passenger side. That bastard that did this will go to jail and be lauded as a hero as he lives out his life behind bars. Tell me how THAT is somehow better than Trailer Park justice, and I'll rest my case. Mind you, this was all on video, as well.

This kind of mindset is disturbing. It's easy to say "this is disgusting, this guy should be genitally mutilated" or whatever because the crime committed is one that strikes us as disgusting and morally repugnant (probably a lot moreso than the "generic" gang murders or whatever that we here about every night, which are really just as bad). However, no matter how severe the crime, the idea that we should throw out procedural justice and resort to the vigilante justice characteristic of the dark ages is a narrow-minded, silly, and morally unjustified response. That's the mentality that has justified the Salem witch hunt, communist blacklisting, lynchings, and lots of other terrible crimes.

If the guy is guilty (and it's pretty apparent, at least to me, that he is), then he'll be convicted anyway. But to claim that you know enough to throw someone in jail without any Constitutionally-guaranteed due process is disturbing, to say the least.

 

[DarienA]

If the guy is guilty (and it's pretty apparent, at least to me, that he is), then he'll be convicted anyway. But to claim that you know enough to throw someone in jail without any Constitutionally-guaranteed due process is disturbing, to say the least.

I basically agree with the first part of your post... the problem is our justice system is fucked... going vigilante isn't the solution, but I'm sure you can see why people would feel that way.

How many times have we seen people get off with a slap on the hand.. parole.... commuted sentences, mistrails, etc... It's nice to think that those who are guilty will always be convicted of the crime... but the real world isn't like that.

 

[Aurum]

I basically agree with the first part of your post... the problem is our justice system is fucked... going vigilante isn't the solution, but I'm sure you can see why people would feel that way.

How many times have we seen people get off with a slap on the hand.. parole.... commuted sentences, mistrails, etc... It's nice to think that those who are guilty will always be convicted of the crime... but the real world isn't like that.

I'd argue that 1) It's better to err on the side of caution (i.e., create a justice system where we're more likely to let the guilty go free than one in which we prosecute an innocent person) because I would say that the rights violation that occurs when an innocent person goes to jail outweighs the potential harm to society from recidivist crime (which is low). So, even if our system isn't perfect, it's better to have a system where it's hard to convict an innocent person (and, similarly, harder to convict a guilty person) than a system where it's too easy to convict both.

And 2) Even if the justice system is flawed, vigilante justice is comparatively worse because it has NO checks on it whatsoever and empirically has resulted in pretty horrible crimes. Letting a guilty person go with a slap on the wrist isn't good, but it's a much safer system.

And 3) That all assumes that your analysis about the flaws in the justice system is true. I would argue that because we don't know for sure that OJ, Kobe, etc are all guilty (lots of people seem to believe that, but it's not clear-cut enough where we can say for sure that there was an injustice done in these cases), we can't necessarily assume that the system is flawed. In addition, there are plenty of examples of the justice system being too eager to convict certain people (look at all the death penalty overturnings because of flawed trials or incomplete evidence).

 

[maharg]

Preventative justice and vigilante justice are both pipe dreams.

 

[Loki]

outweighs the potential harm to society from recidivist crime (which is low).

I don't take issue with your broader stance re: vigilante justice, but the above is simply false. Overall, for perpetrators of violent crimes, the recidivism rate is on the order of 42% last I checked, which means that 42% of violent felons ended up being incarcerated again within 3 years of their release (this number is over 50% in many states). Murderers, somewhat surprisingly, have the lowest recidivism rates of all violent felons at 20%. Still, these numbers are not "low" by any stretch of the imagination. For sex offenders (rapists, pedophiles etc.), the recidivism rate is even worse, at up to 90% for some convicts (pedophiles).

 

[Lemurnator]

There are no words. They both deserve the worst possible punishment imaginable.

They deserve to be burned alive. My heart goes out to that little girl for the rest of her life. That's horrible.

 

[DarienA]

And 3) That all assumes that your analysis about the flaws in the justice system is true. I would argue that because we don't know for sure that OJ, Kobe, etc are all guilty (lots of people seem to believe that, but it's not clear-cut enough where we can say for sure that there was an injustice done in these cases), we can't necessarily assume that the system is flawed. In addition, there are plenty of examples of the justice system being too eager to convict certain people (look at all the death penalty overturnings because of flawed trials or incomplete evidence).

Good job in contradicting yourself... you question whether my statement that the justice system is flawed... then you answer that it is flawed right in the same paragraph.

It's flawed on both sides sometimes the guilty go free and sometimes the innocent get punished. With tainted evidence, witnesses, juries and judges we've shown it's not harder to convict innocent people and not easier to convict guilty people.

Welcome to the real world.

And if you read my post you'd have seen that I said vigilante-ism wasn't the answer.