Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Dune on December 04, 2003, 11:27:04 AM
-
Suspect in Dru Sjodin's disapperance is talking with police. (http://www.msnbc.com/news/1000140.asp?0cv=CB10)
Question: You have a girl who has been kidnapped and perhaps sexually abused. She is missing. She may be dead, or perhaps she's tied up somewhere. The police have the man they believe did the crime (for the moment let's even forget he has an extensive history of sexual crimes). If she's alive, she might not be after too long with cold weather and possibly no food or water.
So, what steps do you take to find out where she is? Mind you, there is no conviction/certain proof your suspect knows at all. But you think he does. What do you do to try and save her life before she starves to death in some closet somewhere?
-
Let the girl's relatives question him, privately.
-
If he is cooperating, I would assume he has said where she is...so then the recovery should be quicker, yes?
Im at a loss...they have the guy, reported, he's talking...but no girl. So what did he do with her and where is she?
-
I was going to say threaten him with the death penalty if the victim dies, but it looks like S. Dakota has not executed anyone in the last 30 years.
AKIron's plan sounds good.
==Edit===
Nevermind. The girl was from North Dakota, not South. ND does not have the death penalty. Neither does Minnesota, where the suspect was arrested.
-
Brushing off my "Law and Order" expertise... Cut him a deal centered on her being recovered alive. Or, If it's just a case of finding the body, I would wait and try to find it without his help and develop evidence from there. He's a repeat offender in a type of crime that shows very poor rehabilitation rates, this was obviously premeditated (if he's guilty) and the next step should be an injection if the death penalty is legal in the state.[not an option here. Since any deal would likely focus on life vs. some possibility of parole, It's a tough one. Is there any leverage for solitary confinement (as opposed to the genral population abuses) or some other incentive that can be attractive to him but never let him back out on the street?]
Charon
-
dbl post
-
Start cutting off toes, then fingers, then genitals, then limbs, until he squawks.
-
Start with the genitals.
-
Let him spend the night in a maximum security prison in a cell with the meanest guy in the place.
-
They have good reasons to believe that he was involved - phone conversations and all that. As such, I believe, that court issued order to drug his bellybutton up to make him talk would be very much in order.
However, some of the suggestions being thrown around here are bit over the side, nothing has been proven yet, innocent until proven guilty still applies.
-
what if you have cut off all his toes and fingers and genitals and someone else confesses? or.. worse yet... she shows up at home and it's all a big joke?
who's fingers, toes and genitals do we then cut off?
same for leaving him to the tender mercies of the family.
for one of the few times here... I agree with fdski... we should pass a LAW that allows questioning under drugs in situations where a life is in danger and could be saved by such an action.
lazs
-
Spoilsport. They can always reattach those toes.
-
drug him, use the info to locate the girl, then throw out all the info you gathered as inadmissable in court.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
drug him, use the info to locate the girl, then throw out all the info you gathered as inadmissable in court.
Then start cutting off toes etc.
I like it. ;)
-
He's a three-time convicted rapist. He should have been killed already. Do whatever you need to do to him to get him to give the location of the body/live person, then finish him off quickly.
-
I agree with sob... he should still be in jail or dead from leathal injection but nooo...
can't agree with curval.. if he is guilty... leathal injection... that torture crap doesn't sit well with me.
if we don't have a law that allows drugs to be used to find the girl then I guess we just gotta let her die. No way around it. I would hope that incidents like this would highlight the need for such a law.
lazs
-
capt. apathy: drug him, use the info to locate the girl, then throw out all the info you gathered as inadmissable in court.
There is nothing in the Constitution that makes an illegally obtained evidence inadmissible in court and it is a rather recent invention of our judiciary.
Yes, the Constitution makes it illegal to conduct unreasonable searches or torture, etc. but that only means that people who performed them have commited an offence and should be punished. It does not mean that evidence is invalid.
Treating that evidence as invalid only helps criminals and never law-abiding citizens, beause an unreasobnable search of a non-criminal would not find anything anyway while an unreasonable search of a criminal would invalidate the evidence.
On this particular case, the police is known to grab the first suspicious guy who is often innocent. Torture is a punishment and there cannot be punishment before conviction.
miko
-
The stunninghunk Is a product Of our courte system!
Appeals and paroles.
they Have known that there was an80 to90% chance he would be a repete offender.
So why In Gods name was he ever set free?
So in there lies the issue.
It Is stuff like this that makes me glad I have no kids.
Being a parent In these times must be hard.
-
Treating that evidence as invalid only helps criminals and never law-abiding citizens, beause an unreasobnable search of a non-criminal would not find anything anyway while an unreasonable search of a criminal would invalidate the evidence.
it helps law abiding citsens by discouraging unlawful searches. the fact is that cops are never charged for illeagal searches. (at least I never hear of it happening)
so throwing out illegaly obtained evidence is the only way to discourage these violations.
idealy they would charge police when they do ilegal searches and let them have the same incentive to follow the law that the rest of us have. until then this is the only way we have to discourage it.
-
could he be convicted federally? (bringing a child kidnaped across state lines)?
if so federal law DOES have a death penalty... and overrides whatever state he's arrested in.
but yes drug, maim, injure, sterlize, castrate, smash fingers with a ball peen hammer, cut off ear with razor, dip his wee wee in a tank of starved pirannah's... whatever needed to save that girl's life.
-
Actually, if you look at Apathy's thoughs, for one, it sounds very little like a police state. As far as I'm concerned though, he should already be dead so he doesn't deserve the rights afforded the average citizen.
-
A bigger issue is letting these people back out in the first place. Studies indicate that hard core sexual predators are unlikely to ever be fully rehabilitated and perhaps require drastic measure beyond what would be typical for some other kind of assault. Apparently, some hack psychologist made a bad call on this dude, and some poor girl had to pay for his or her stupidity.
Charon
-
I feel really sorry for her parents, and for her, where ever she is...
:(
-
Chemical interrogation is chemical interrogation no matter how you justify it. Forcing people to speak or do something without justice by the people is the very definition of a police state.
That's your opinion. By throwing out any evidence gained while he is under the influence of a controlled substance introduced by the police, you preserve his rights while possibly saving an innocent victim.
Since you think he should already be dead I take it you consider rape a capital offence?
You would be correct in that assumption. While I could see leniency on the first offense with some special circumstances, once he did it again he made it clear he's not fit to live among the rest of us.
-
LOL, whatever.
-
This individual has already proven he is incapable of rehabilitation. There is no reason to maintain his existance at public cost as he has no chance to rejoin society as a "good citizen".
As to the constitution not prohibiting the use of evidence not found in accordance with a proper search, the document does not use that verbage. The supremes using their office and purpose of interpreting law for constitutionality have already determined it was the "intent" of the framers of the constitution to prohibit the use of "tainted" evidence. There is no reason to prohibit unwarranted or unreasonable searches and siezures if the evidence is going to be allowed it in court anyhow. Fruits of a tainted search are not allowed in court. That is the main incentive to insure police use a proper search.
What constitutes a proper search is open at times to interpretation as a judge has the authority to render a search warrant. Cases involving exigency will allow a warrantless search in limited situations. A permissive search granted by the person responsible for the property to be searched do not require a warrant.
As to what the police can do in this case, they have to follow the rule of law lest they themselves be prosecuted for civil rights violations. Of course there is no recourse for the victim of this predator outside of a courtroom and she has to survive to seek it. :(
What we would like to see of course is the victim found alive and able to continue her life. She will always be haunted by this experiance if she is alive and competant.
As to the normal feelings of those who see this tragedy, yes they are not pleasant. But then again rape is not pleasant either and cannot be expunged or retracted. The victim will live with it for the rest of her life. Anyone who thinks this is not traumatic and just short of being murdered is living in a fantasy world.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Since you think he should already be dead I take it you consider rape a capital offence?
umm pretty much yes. no less than life in prison no parole at least.
the fact he has done this before and wont stop makes him a predator.. somone who cant be "fixed"
the real question i think alot fo the "let's not hurt him" crowd arent asking is:
what would you want done if it was your daughter?
would you really say:
Letting My Daughter die because I have to follow due process = An unfortunate but unavoidable part of a free society.
(yes i edited to reflect the thought process)
somone who says that IMHO is not a parent and probably shouldn't have children anyway.
oh well another lame thought by yours truly
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Where do you draw the line?
Certainly behind this guy.
-
I think we need to hold those responsible for putting this guy back on the street criminally accountable, they deserve to do hard time. I betcha that if we started doing that parolees would get a bit a more scrutiny.
GScholz, free society doesn't mean free from responsibilty, quite the opposite.
-
hmmm... long history of sexual crimes?
Start at the toes and work your way up. No screwing around, work at a speed in which all appendages would be severed in about 3 minutes.
I'm bettin he'd talk by toe 3.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Where do you draw the line?
Perverted crime #2.
-
Originally posted by SOB
You would be correct in that assumption. While I could see leniency on the first offense with some special circumstances, once he did it again he made it clear he's not fit to live among the rest of us.
OMG!!
We agree on something:aok
-
Sodium Pentathol
:D
-
Shes already dead. No doubt about it.
-
I like the idea of using drugs to get into the head of suspect in these kinds of situations when there is good case of finding the victim alive within limited time. Thats because if somebody else shows up guilty, as it will happen eventually on some similar case, no physical harm has been done to the innocent suspect. So big no to the torture, couple of nutcases dont give enough reason to start using medieval questioning techniques. Its whole another issue whether he should have been jailed for life in previous cases, it still doesent give any right to start torturing him. He is not guilty for the shortcomings of juridical justice.
-
Originally posted by Dune
Suspect in Dru Sjodin's disapperance is talking with police. (http://www.msnbc.com/news/1000140.asp?0cv=CB10)
Question: You have a girl who has been kidnapped and perhaps sexually abused. She is missing. She may be dead, or perhaps she's tied up somewhere. The police have the man they believe did the crime (for the moment let's even forget he has an extensive history of sexual crimes). If she's alive, she might not be after too long with cold weather and possibly no food or water.
So, what steps do you take to find out where she is? Mind you, there is no conviction/certain proof your suspect knows at all. But you think he does. What do you do to try and save her life before she starves to death in some closet somewhere?
The real question is how did I get her? How did she end up in my closet? After all, I'm not the kidnapper/assaulter. I mean .. if I find her (dead or alive), calling the police right away sounds like the best bet.
The next part is kinda confusing ... because if I have her (especially if she's tied up ... or worse ... :() then I should be able to easily keep track of her. If the suspect they have in custody knows her location then time is certainly of the essense and I better contact the police before he says anything so I don't appear to be an accessory. Then again, things already look suspicious. After all, she somehow ended up in my closet, that certainly looks bad.
If she's alive I would definately feed her and make sure she's warm and safe if it appears that she's hungry and cold. Especially since she could then help prove my innocence. Her being dead, however, could be a real problem.
-
Originally posted by mrblack
The stunninghunk Is a product Of our courte system!
Appeals and paroles.
they Have known that there was an80 to90% chance he would be a repete offender.
So why In Gods name was he ever set free?
So in there lies the issue.
It Is stuff like this that makes me glad I have no kids.
Being a parent In these times must be hard.
Don't know really, but sometimes a reason given is jail overcrowding for early releases. Many people are for new jails except for two things:
1) Increased taxes.
2) Location. No one wants a prison built in their county for the loss in property values.
-
hmm interesting....
If it is him...his background SEEMS to point to a NON-aggressive rapist...meaning he doesn't kill his victims after the rape....did he use the same methods as previous times...not answered...anymore victims of rape in that sector?....not answered.
But he just came out of jail....20 years in there plays funny on a mans brain function....
EVIDENCE....non found....only circumstantial
but a criminal profiler will find the fact that he asked to stay INSIDE on the same level as OJ Simson running in his vehicle.....GUILT....the journalist interprets this as a safety issue....it is NOT....there close and he knows it.
-
Right.. a non aggressive... RAPIST. Makes a lot of sense to me. Ok, not really.
-
Get off your self-riteous soapbox Gsholz and quit putting words into people's mouths.
-
Seriously, I'm sorry you're a tool. I would certainly not want to see you executed for this, as I'm sure therapy would help.
-
Based on the law as it stands, I would seriously have to consider a plea agreement whereby if he tells where she is and she is found alive, he gets a walk on the kiddnapping and other possible charges.
He's going to be in deep trouble with violating his probation anyway and I think that saving the life of this girl is worth it. However, is she is not alive, all bets are off.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
(chemical interrogation is torture
No it’s not. Administering thiopental (or related short-acting barbiturates) does not cause extreme physical or emotional distress, the usual definition of torture. In fact, these same drugs are used for anesthesia during medical procedures.
-
DRUG him to save the get the info and save the girl(then court let him out for violation of his rights) then family mebers beat the crap out of him and to label him a pervert they tatoo GSchols on his forhead .:mad:
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Right.. a non aggressive... RAPIST. Makes a lot of sense to me. Ok, not really.
do you know anything about criminal profiling Urchin....from what you wrote...I don't think you do.
lemme show you the difference.....
1 who rapes, beats, mutilate....that would be a violent rapist....1 you should now is TED BUNDY....he had a very bad HATE DISORDER concerning women....another is Mr.X(or the monster of Russia)....he raped, beat, and mutilated young girls and boys genitilias.
1 who rapes but lets the victim live...is a NON-Aggressive rapist....lots of these around...just look at all the rape charges goin around with professional athletes.
hope you understand what I meant now:aok
-
Scare him into confession with a potential life confined in the same room with Linda Tripp
-
capt. apathy: it helps law abiding citsens by discouraging unlawful searches.
True. But an illegal search is just a (major) inconvenience to a law-abiding citizen. To a criminal it's get out of jail card. Very assymetric.
so throwing out illegaly obtained evidence is the only way to discourage these violations.
By punishing those who have not commited the illegal search (the past and future victims of the criminal) but not those who are guilty of it - the errant cops?
How is it supposed to discourage anythyng?
idealy they would charge police when they do ilegal searches
Right. Charge them with breaking and entering just like any other illegal intruder and
miko
-
Originally posted by SLO
do you know anything about criminal profiling Urchin....from what you wrote...I don't think you do.
lemme show you the difference.....
1 who rapes, beats, mutilate....that would be a violent rapist....1 you should now is TED BUNDY....he had a very bad HATE DISORDER concerning women....another is Mr.X(or the monster of Russia)....he raped, beat, and mutilated young girls and boys genitilias.
1 who rapes but lets the victim live...is a NON-Aggressive rapist....lots of these around...just look at all the rape charges goin around with professional athletes.
hope you understand what I meant now:aok
Don't be a handsomehunk: She said that in 1980 she was less than a block from her home there when Rodriguez approached and asked for directions.
“When I told him that he must be on the wrong street, then he turned and came in front of me and he pulled a knife,” Whalen said. “He said ’get in the car or I’ll kill you.’ I reached out with my left hand, I was going to hit him or push him or something, and then he stabbed me in the left elbow and in the stomach and ran to his car, and I ran home.”
What about that situation says "non-agressive"?
MiniD
-
Anyone who thinks rape is not aggressive or violent is sadly mistaken.
-
sorry mini-d....didn't see that in original article...your qoute that is.
and the don't be a handsomehunk comment is for what exactly....missing something there....from the original article they did not post his background....guess you researched more just so you can call someone a handsomehunk or what.
Maverick....goes to show you know nothing of criminal profiling.....
example : a drunk student(girl) gets raped while she is completly
knocked out from booze....the agressor DID NOT beat her.....DID
NOT perform any violence on her(exept of course the rape
itself) target of oppurtunity for a rapist....no agression no
violence.....hence your theory gets flushed.
hope this makes you understand what I meant :aok
-
I think rape should have conditional penalties much like murder. I think that any second rape where absolute proof was available should result in life in prison or death. Rape affects all of us in the ripples it causes. It ruins lives and those lives ruin lives. We really can't afford to have these predators loose and attacking the most helpless..
course now women owning and training with handguns is up 66% in the U.S. this is a statistic of great concern to the anti gun crowd since women and womenly men have allways been their staunchest supporters allong with some traumatized burn outs. If the lose the womens backing they know they will lose the womenly mens backing.
lazs
-
SLO... I don't know much about profiling, and actually don't think any really does any more since it's been pretty ineffective in most big cases for the last 3 years... but I do know this...
You don't go into "profiling" discussions based on one sentance... criticizing everyone that can see 3 rapes as being agressive simply because you didn't see text that said what you feel it should.
To be honest... everyone else was hitting the "profiling" right. You were as far off as they get. The fact that it only became relevant later is a moot point. You were wrong then, you're wrong now.
MiniD
-
they invented the rack for something...
-
Miko, as someone in the field of criminal justice, I have to completely disagree with your idea. One of the central tennants of the Constitution is being secure in your home and in our persons. You cannot have a system where the police are allowed to use illegally gained evidence. You will create fishing expeditions. The best way to prevent the police from overstepping their authority is to prevent them from using the very thing that led them to overstep. Before a person is deprived of their liberty, even for as short as time as an investigation, there must be enough evidence to warrant it.
If the police come into my house even though I've done nothing wrong, that is not an inconveinence, that is a violation of my rights as an American. More than you could, I understand the frustration that sometimes accompanies working within the system as it stands. However, in a million years I would not want yours.
-
Originally posted by SLO
DID
NOT perform any violence on her(exept of course the rape
itself)
You still don't get it, and I doubt you ever will. At least you acknowledged that rape is in fact violence. Perhaps if it happened to one in your family you would understand it. Note that I am not advocating it, just that perhaps you need a reality check here.
Please also note that in none of my posts have I used the term criminal profiling directly or indirectly.