Author Topic: 8 Golly-geen years???? (Read 1024 times)

GRUNHERZ · « **on:** November 16, 2004, 04:56:00 AM »

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/11/16/spain.bomb.trial/index.html

Saintaw · « **Reply #1 on:** November 16, 2004, 05:09:56 AM »

That isn't much.

Pepe · « **Reply #2 on:** November 16, 2004, 05:46:27 AM »

We are the ones that suffer a naive Criminal Code from the first socialist period, applied by an inoperant Justice as reformed by the firs socialist government, in a country populated by generations of functional illiterates created by a socialist reform of education, and presided by a coward, not-so-intelligent, left-wing anti-american socialist.

Oh...we are progresists, pro-europeans, don't you know?

I think we better ask for french citizenship before it's too late.

mora · « **Reply #3 on:** November 16, 2004, 05:55:20 AM »

Juveniles are usually given lower sentences in yurop. This is the downside of it.

Fishu · « **Reply #4 on:** November 16, 2004, 06:02:51 AM »

8 years? heck, I'd give that for a single murder, let alone nearly two hundred dead and numerous wounded.

Sure he might be young and done it in haste due to lack of money, but that doesnt mean he shouldn't be held fully responsible.
He should get a loooooong time in prison. Maybe other similar cases would then take a longer time to think whether to help the terrorist.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #5 on:** November 16, 2004, 07:00:23 AM »

All of them should get the death penalty IMO.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #6 on:** November 16, 2004, 07:09:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
I think it would all depend on whether the kid knew what the explosives were going to be used for. If he didn't he's actually not guilty of anything more than accessory to theft.

Quote

The juvenile is alleged to have waited nearly six hours during the night, hiding with their car in the heavy overgrowth, while the others filled backpack after backpack with explosives.
According to a court document, the boy knew exactly what was going on.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #7 on:** November 16, 2004, 07:48:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Yes he knew that they were stealing explosives, but that still doesn't answer my question if the kid knew what the explosives was going to be used for.

This is true.
I guess he was figuring they were going to use them in a really neato fireworks display at the next family picnic:rolleyes:

Why is it this kid should only be guilty of accessory to theft and a marine who's life is on the line every day and who in all likely hood has at least one of his buddies blown away by someone pretending to be dead or by a booby trapped dead body is guilty of Klliing an unarmed and (as yet to be determined) POW?

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #8 on:** November 16, 2004, 08:39:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Because the kid only helped steal explosives, while the Marine executed an unarmed prisoner.

And according to the article the kid "knew what was going on"
And you dont steal explosives of that nature just for chuckles

Two problems with your arguement.

It is as yet undetermined if he was indeed a POW and they had no way of knowing untill after he was dead if he was unarmed.
In light of unknowing you err on the side of caution and assume he is armed.

Bodhi · « **Reply #9 on:** November 16, 2004, 09:07:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
I think it would all depend on whether the kid knew what the explosives were going to be used for. If he didn't he's actually not guilty of anything more than accessory to theft.

Lol, in the US, explosives are considered a controlled substance. Apparently not in Europe though. Had that happened here, he'd have fried alongside McVeigh like Nichols is going to.

AKIron · « **Reply #10 on:** November 16, 2004, 10:00:08 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Because the kid only helped steal explosives, while the Marine executed an unarmed prisoner.

Comments like this prove what an anti-american zealot nazi boy here really is. Those marines were being killed by iraqis feigning death only to open fire or blow everyone up, 100% justified imo. Someone please quote me.

Suave · « **Reply #11 on:** November 16, 2004, 10:26:05 AM »

Lets suppose just for whimsy that his intent wasn't to kill. He deployed the explosives, so he would still be guilty of mass murder by gross negligence. Which should be life in prison at a minimum.

And dragging the marine shooting into this thread makes you appear to be a strange individual.

AWMac · « **Reply #12 on:** November 16, 2004, 10:39:18 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Actually he did not "deploy" the explosives, he only helped steal them from a mine. AFAIK he had nothing to do with the actual bombings.

And btw. if your last comment was directed at me, I did not drag the marine shooting into this thread. Someone else did.

What a MORON.

jEEZY · « **Reply #13 on:** November 16, 2004, 10:42:01 AM »

Originally posted by GScholz
I think it would all depend on whether the kid knew what the explosives were going to be used for. If he didn't he's actually not guilty of anything more than accessory to theft.

A judge I once worked for once aswered the question of intent like so:

"A person's intent can be determined by what they eventually did."

Kid delivered explosives. Explosives used to murder over 100 people. Ipso facto, kid intended that delivered explosives be used in attack.

The idea that he was simply an "accessory" to theft is naive to the point of being dangerous. What did the kid, word used very liberally, think the guy he delivered the dynamite was going to do with it in the middle of Madrid? Open a new mine? Note this is a classic case of aiding and abetting. Accessory to theft lol.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #14 on:** November 16, 2004, 10:53:20 AM »

Golly-geen!
-SW