Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on November 16, 2004, 04:56:00 AM
-
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/11/16/spain.bomb.trial/index.html
-
That isn't much.
-
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.
-
Juveniles are usually given lower sentences in yurop. This is the downside of it.
-
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.
-
All of them should get the death penalty IMO.
-
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.
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Golly-geen!
-SW
-
I'm usually on the side of stiff punishment, but I'm not so sure that 8 years isn't stiff punishment for what the kid did. And he most certainly is a kid, and prone to not thinking about the end result of his actions. I suppose it depends on what is meant by: "According to a court document, the boy knew exactly what was going on.". If he knew they planned on bombing the train station, then it's lethal injection time, I don't care if he's 16. If he just knew they were stealing explosives, then I can understand the 8 years. Of course, it really doesn't matter what I think since I ain't Spanish and don't know anyone who got killed.
-
A shame all around dont you think?
an aside: I generally am not in favor of our federal sentencing guidlines, but a quick look through them right now tells me that had that kid done his deed here (the US) he would be up for at least ten years given the nature of the crime.
-
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.
Boy, you are "Mr. Devil's Advocate" on every post in here. You are so juvenile. Get a fuggin life.
Karaya
-
Yep he was just an innocent kid. Those evil train passengers had it coming anyhow. Every 16 year old in todays world knows there is absolutely nothing wrong with smuggling dynamite into an urban area. After all it is used just about every day there to make the world a better place. I can't see any possible reason the kid should have to feel bad after hiding from the Police and delivering dynamite to people in the city.
:rolleyes:
Some people seem to think every terrorist act has some justification. They need to get a clue.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Some people seem to think every terrorist act has some justification. They need to get a clue.
And then others are just condescending sweetheart bags who can't bear to think that someone else may have a different opinion than them without having devious motives.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Actually I'm quite serious, and so is the Spanish court of law.
I have a life, but thanks for your concern.
No, I've discovered the name of your pathetic game. Spain?, I never mentioned Spain. Go do some dishes.
Karaya
-
I guess it all comes down to 'beyond reasonable doubt' rather than 'balance of probabilities'. AFAIK, most criminal courts around the world use the former in judgement.
And why drag the alledged marine war crimes into this? Sounds reminiscent of the German defence of the Dinant massacres of WW1.
"They didn't shoot any civilians, but if they did, they were provoked."
No justification at all I'm afraid, if true - and that hasn't been proven yet.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
And you dont steal explosives of that nature just for chuckles
I personally know 3 guys who did just that, stole from rock quarry. set them off in open field for laughs.
and went on a fishing trip afterwards.
they were caught and sentenced. 2 yrs suspended for 5 yrs probation, something like that.
was in the 70's. can't remb exact.